Jump to content

Another new law


Recommended Posts

I seem to have wandered into the constitutional law debate forum. Can somebody point me towards the geocaching forum...?

 

I think it's more like the conspiracy theorists forums... :anitongue:;):D:D:laughing:;)

 

Yes, all of us conspiracy theorists are just a bunch of blind ignorant fools who have a complete lack of foresight.

 

Maybe some day we'll be as smart as you.

 

Fortunately at your age you'll probably be gone before you get to witness the dissolution of your freedoms.

 

So why stress over this thread? Move on and enjoy your life while you still have it.

Honestly, you guys are sounding more than a little paranoid.

Link to comment

I seem to have wandered into the constitutional law debate forum. Can somebody point me towards the geocaching forum...?

 

I think it's more like the conspiracy theorists forums... :anitongue:;):D:D:laughing:;)

 

Yes, all of us conspiracy theorists are just a bunch of blind ignorant fools who have a complete lack of foresight.

 

Maybe some day we'll be as smart as you.

 

Fortunately at your age you'll probably be gone before you get to witness the dissolution of your freedoms.

 

So why stress over this thread? Move on and enjoy your life while you still have it.

Honestly, you guys are sounding more than a little paranoid.

 

Shhhh... the black helicopters will hear you.

Link to comment

I can't believe some of you are actually defending anybody's "right" to endanger others by distracting themelves with texting and/or data entry on a GPS and driving.

 

Look I'm as conservative (right wing nut job) as they come but I just can't defend the indefensible. Folks can't control themselves - then somebody has a to do it for them.

Link to comment
... I do believe that the government has WAY overstepped it's role. In the US. National Defense, Interstate Commerce, International Trade, and a few other things are the perview of the government. It is NOT the governments job to take care of you, to make sure you get an education, to make sure you have a job or that you even eat. It is the government's job to make sure you can EARN these things.
Interesting things you have listed there. From that list, it's a wonder that we have state or local government, at all.

 

... As for looking at a GPS while driving, I believe this would fall under "Reckless" or "Careless" driving in most states. Why do we need to narrow it down? Cell Phone-Drinking Coffee/Soda-Eating French Fries-Changing the Radio, etc.... can all cause reckless or careless driving. ...
Simple. It allows them to ignore the subjective 'reckless' standard in favor of a simple black-and-white regulation. A driver was either using the device or not.

 

EXACTLY the problem.

It says nothing about safety if the use is the infraction and not the distraction.

Your logic would prove that its a law that makes little sense and is meant to punish the people (and generate revenue) for something that is not harming anyone.

Your comment contends that there need be no distraction, no carelessness, no recklessness, only a cell phone.

 

Remember folks, cell phones don't kill people distracted drivers kill people.

Link to comment
... I do believe that the government has WAY overstepped it's role. In the US. National Defense, Interstate Commerce, International Trade, and a few other things are the perview of the government. It is NOT the governments job to take care of you, to make sure you get an education, to make sure you have a job or that you even eat. It is the government's job to make sure you can EARN these things.
Interesting things you have listed there. From that list, it's a wonder that we have state or local government, at all.

 

... As for looking at a GPS while driving, I believe this would fall under "Reckless" or "Careless" driving in most states. Why do we need to narrow it down? Cell Phone-Drinking Coffee/Soda-Eating French Fries-Changing the Radio, etc.... can all cause reckless or careless driving. ...
Simple. It allows them to ignore the subjective 'reckless' standard in favor of a simple black-and-white regulation. A driver was either using the device or not.

 

EXACTLY the problem.

It says nothing about safety if the use is the infraction and not the distraction.

Your logic would prove that its a law that makes little sense and is meant to punish the people (and generate revenue) for something that is not harming anyone.

Your comment contends that there need be no distraction, no carelessness, no recklessness, only a cell phone.

 

Remember folks, cell phones don't kill people distracted drivers kill people.

 

Not harming anyone? Really?

 

Remember, it's IRRESPONSIBLE PEOPLE who USE CELL PHONES while driving that KILL PEOPLE! THANKFULLY, we can do something about those irresponsible people!

 

The cell phone IS the distraction...maybe you're missing that point?

Link to comment

I seem to have wandered into the constitutional law debate forum. Can somebody point me towards the geocaching forum...?

 

I think it's more like the conspiracy theorists forums... :anitongue:;):D:D:laughing:;)

 

Yes, all of us conspiracy theorists are just a bunch of blind ignorant fools who have a complete lack of foresight.

 

Maybe some day we'll be as smart as you.

 

Fortunately at your age you'll probably be gone before you get to witness the dissolution of your freedoms.

 

So why stress over this thread? Move on and enjoy your life while you still have it.

Honestly, you guys are sounding more than a little paranoid.

 

A little? That's a gross understatement! :anitongue:

 

My advice to the one telling me to not stress and move on, follow your same advice before you give yourself a heart attack...

Link to comment

OH MY, mean old gobment peoples are trying to make my life safer...shame on them for making a penny or two in the process...BROTHER!

 

You conspiracy throrists sure do make it fun to read these threads though, THANKS!!

 

As for the law against programming a GPS or using a cell phone while driving...BRAVO! As I rode into work this morning, I was met with irresposible driver after another, all using the cell phone. One was even coming out of her residential driveway...can't make that oh so important call before getting behind the wheel?

 

Those who say they shouldn't be pulled over if they're driving safely, BULL. We should just wait until you DO cause an accident? PLEASE!

 

I'm still wondering if KBI has made his mind up about passengers yet? :D

 

You will care when they come to the conclusion that motorcycle riders are reckless and ban the dangerous death coasters for the bane on society they are.

 

Fortunately, the motorcycle itself is fairly safe, it's the IRRESPONSIBLE drivers who can't see us because they're either distracted or too lazy to PAY ATTENTION that are dangerous and cause most of the accidents. You might understand better if you knew that over 70% of ALL car/motorcycle accidents are caused by a distracted driver turning left in front of a motorcyclist. The common excuse..."I didn't see him"! That's no excuse, that's admitting to manslaughter. I am all for any law which invites people to PAY ATTENTION and makes MY life a bit safer!

 

Therefore, if we remove the distractions from driving, motorcycles would be that much safer to ride! :D This would be the MAJOR reason I am all for the ban!

 

I will again state: You can pinpoint the moment a driver gets a phone call, his/her speed instantly drops 10 mph, for no obvious reason to those who aren't watching. Then, they swerve here and there while their distracted state chats away, oblivious to those around them. Funny thing, as soon as you try to pass this careless driver, they suddenly are reminded they are DRIVING and try to speed back up making the pass even more dangerous!

 

I had a conversation with my brother this morning, I explained this thread to him. His response "About time. I got a call the other day and, when I hung up, found I was in my driveway and had no idea how I made it"...even though he uses a cell phone, he is all for the ban and can understand the reasoning behind it! His recounting of the drive home and not remembering how he got there really makes this point for me!

 

I don't even OWN a cell phone.

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

Hey, while we are at it, let's make a law about how much red meat we are allowed to eat, and vegetables, and fruit, etc.... That way, we reduce our risk of a heart attack or stroke while driving and we don't endanger other drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.

 

Let's outlaw smoking while in the presence of ANYONE else, second hand smoke kills.

 

Let's outlaw climate control and radios in cars.

 

Let's outlaw mirrors that have to be adjusted by hand, only steering wheel remote control mirrors are allowed.

 

Let's outlaw bicycling on roads, they don't pay taxes to build and maintain the roads anyway.

 

Let's require BOTH HANDS on the wheel at all times. You MUST stop to change gears. The only exception being a manual transmission but only 3 seconds per gear shift.

 

Let's require a 4 point restraint system.

 

Let's require a full face helmet for while you drive.

 

Let's require an automatic fire supression system on all vehicles.

 

Mommy Government will TAKE CARE OF YOU!!!!

Link to comment

 

Fortunately, the motorcycle itself is fairly safe, it's the IRRESPONSIBLE drivers who can't see us because they're either distracted or too lazy to PAY ATTENTION that are dangerous and cause most of the accidents. You might understand better if you knew that over 70% of ALL car/motorcycle accidents are caused by a distracted driver turning left in front of a motorcyclist. The common excuse..."I didn't see him"! That's no excuse, that's admitting to manslaughter. I am all for any law which invites people to PAY ATTENTION and makes MY life a bit safer!

 

Therefore, if we remove the distractions from driving, motorcycles would be that much safer to ride! :D This would be the MAJOR reason I am all for the ban!

 

I will again state: You can pinpoint the moment a driver gets a phone call, his/her speed instantly drops 10 mph, for no obvious reason to those who aren't watching. Then, they swerve here and there while their distracted state chats away, oblivious to those around them. Funny thing, as soon as you try to pass this careless driver, they suddenly are reminded they are DRIVING and try to speed back up making the pass even more dangerous!

 

I had a conversation with my brother this morning, I explained this thread to him. His response "About time. I got a call the other day and, when I hung up, found I was in my driveway and had no idea how I made it"...even though he uses a cell phone, he is all for the ban and can understand the reasoning behind it! His recounting of the drive home and not remembering how he got there really makes this point for me!

 

I don't even OWN a cell phone.

 

Your argument is exactly what I expected. Motorcyclists are responsible driver and the mere fact that they are in a much more fragile vehicle makes them no less safe than a hummer. It's the "other" drivers on the road that is the problem.

It's not the weaving in and out of traffic, its not the speeding, it's not the bees flying into helmets, it's not the possibility of one tire blowing. It's the "other" drivers on the road.

 

If seat belts makes the world safer then banning motorcycles would be the only way to keep the world safe, since there is no way to put a seat belt on a bike.

 

You will never see the hypocricy of your position so I won't continue.

 

I will say this. I used to ride a motorcycle as my primary transportation. I DO know of what I speak. I was taken out by a driver who turned right with his left blinker on. Guess what? He wasn't on a cell phone!

I also know the inherit dangers of motorcycles on the road. I have had a few wrecks and logged many thousands of miles. I know EXACTLY what riding a bike is all about.

 

Not owning a cell phone, yourself, pretty much removes your ability to objectively comment. You imply that EVERY cell phone user is a blooming idiot as soon as they answer their phone and that is simply not the case and most everyone knows it.

 

I want to add that I have seen and heard of so many motorcycle accidents where the motorcycle rider was the culprit and the result was death. Not only the death of the driver but the passenger as well.

In the summer, the per capita of accidents (and corresponding deaths) indicates that more people die because of motorcycles than cars.

 

Motorcycles need to be banned cuz motorcycles kill people, obviously not the riders because they are all responsible.

Link to comment

I seem to have wandered into the constitutional law debate forum. Can somebody point me towards the geocaching forum...?

 

I think it's more like the conspiracy theorists forums... :o:rolleyes::blink::D:D:laughing:

 

Yes, all of us conspiracy theorists are just a bunch of blind ignorant fools who have a complete lack of foresight.

 

Maybe some day we'll be as smart as you.

 

Fortunately at your age you'll probably be gone before you get to witness the dissolution of your freedoms.

 

So why stress over this thread? Move on and enjoy your life while you still have it.

Honestly, you guys are sounding more than a little paranoid.

 

A little? That's a gross understatement! :D

 

My advice to the one telling me to not stress and move on, follow your same advice before you give yourself a heart attack...

 

Well, I'm still young enough to get away with acting like an idiot. What's your excuse?

You're posting like mad in this thread. I have what 3,4, maybe 5 replies.

Link to comment

 

Well, I'm still young enough to get away with acting like an idiot. What's your excuse?

You're posting like mad in this thread. I have what 3,4, maybe 5 replies.

 

I didn't know I needed an "excuse" to post in any thread, but since you ask...I wholeheartedly believe in the law and am more than happy to state that! if it truly bothers you as much as it seems, I merely suggested you follow your own advice. If this seemed rude to you, well, it WAS your advice! :D

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

Rockin Roddy, I whole heartedly believe in the law as well. But, I am also smart enough to know when there is a bad law. In Denver, Colorado, it is ILLEGAL for a cat to walk down Main Street without an illuminated red light attached to it's tail. IT IS THE LAW. Although this is an extreme case, there must have been some reason for it at the time. There are literally THOUSANDS of such laws across the United States.

 

As I posted earlier, you can't outlaw stupidity. Whether it is a motorcyclist accelerating from zero to 70 in 2.7 seconds, a person talking on a cell phone who can't walk and chew gum at the same time or a person putting on make up while driving.

 

Personally, I wear a helmet on a bike, I buckle up, I keep cell phone talk to a minimum, a never drink and drive, I have NEVER done a controlled substance in my entire life. And not because it is the law, but because it is WISE. I have even used a cell phone while driving to report a Drunk Driver on a Los Angeles Freeway. I just don't like the idea that the government thinks it can take better care of me than I can.

Edited by Inmountains
Link to comment

 

Fortunately, the motorcycle itself is fairly safe, it's the IRRESPONSIBLE drivers who can't see us because they're either distracted or too lazy to PAY ATTENTION that are dangerous and cause most of the accidents. You might understand better if you knew that over 70% of ALL car/motorcycle accidents are caused by a distracted driver turning left in front of a motorcyclist. The common excuse..."I didn't see him"! That's no excuse, that's admitting to manslaughter. I am all for any law which invites people to PAY ATTENTION and makes MY life a bit safer!

 

Therefore, if we remove the distractions from driving, motorcycles would be that much safer to ride! :D This would be the MAJOR reason I am all for the ban!

 

I will again state: You can pinpoint the moment a driver gets a phone call, his/her speed instantly drops 10 mph, for no obvious reason to those who aren't watching. Then, they swerve here and there while their distracted state chats away, oblivious to those around them. Funny thing, as soon as you try to pass this careless driver, they suddenly are reminded they are DRIVING and try to speed back up making the pass even more dangerous!

 

I had a conversation with my brother this morning, I explained this thread to him. His response "About time. I got a call the other day and, when I hung up, found I was in my driveway and had no idea how I made it"...even though he uses a cell phone, he is all for the ban and can understand the reasoning behind it! His recounting of the drive home and not remembering how he got there really makes this point for me!

 

I don't even OWN a cell phone.

 

Your argument is exactly what I expected. Motorcyclists are responsible driver and the mere fact that they are in a much more fragile vehicle makes them no less safe than a hummer. It's the "other" drivers on the road that is the problem.

It's not the weaving in and out of traffic, its not the speeding, it's not the bees flying into helmets, it's not the possibility of one tire blowing. It's the "other" drivers on the road.

 

If seat belts makes the world safer then banning motorcycles would be the only way to keep the world safe, since there is no way to put a seat belt on a bike.

 

You will never see the hypocricy of your position so I won't continue.

 

I will say this. I used to ride a motorcycle as my primary transportation. I DO know of what I speak. I was taken out by a driver who turned right with his left blinker on. Guess what? He wasn't on a cell phone!

I also know the inherit dangers of motorcycles on the road. I have had a few wrecks and logged many thousands of miles. I know EXACTLY what riding a bike is all about.

 

Not owning a cell phone, yourself, pretty much removes your ability to objectively comment. You imply that EVERY cell phone user is a blooming idiot as soon as they answer their phone and that is simply not the case and most everyone knows it.

 

I want to add that I have seen and heard of so many motorcycle accidents where the motorcycle rider was the culprit and the result was death. Not only the death of the driver but the passenger as well.

In the summer, the per capita of accidents (and corresponding deaths) indicates that more people die because of motorcycles than cars.

 

Motorcycles need to be banned cuz motorcycles kill people, obviously not the riders because they are all responsible.

 

The boldened red comment, do you have ANY evidence to back this up? I am going to have to cry BULL! Actually, I call BULL on the whole post as it's just a bunch of sensationalistic rantings...

 

Since you say you've ridden a bike, tell me who's fault was the accident you were in? Do you suppose that driver was paying attention or was that driver driving distracted? :D

 

I also love how you lump bad riders in as if everyone rides in that manner...good try though! Just like there are irresponsible phone users, irresponsible drivers and so on, there are also irresponsible riders.

 

If you're going to continue the irrational postings, I'll just have to ignore you...

 

Since I don't own a phone, I have no right to an opinion? OK! Good try! Where did you see I said every? I said you can tell when a driver answers a phone...I would contend there are responsible users out there. Please stop being so sensationalistic.

Link to comment

Rockin Roddy, I whole heartedly believe in the law as well. But, I am also smart enough to know when there is a bad law. In Denver, Colorado, it is ILLEGAL for a cat to walk down Main Street without an illuminated red light attached to it's tail. IT IS THE LAW. Although this is an extreme case, there must have been some reason for it at the time. There are literally THOUSANDS of such laws across the United States.

 

As I posted earlier, you can't outlaw stupidity. Whether it is a motorcyclist accelerating from zero to 70 in 2.7 seconds, a person talking on a cell phone who can't walk and chew gum at the same time or a person putting on make up while driving.

 

Personally, I wear a helmet on a bike, I buckle up, I keep cell phone talk to a minimum, a never drink and drive, I have NEVER done a controlled substance in my entire life. And not because it is the law, but because it is WISE. I have even used a cell phone while driving to report a Drunk Driver on a Los Angeles Freeway. I just don't like the idea that the government thinks it can take better care of me than I can.

 

Then truly, you have nothing to worry about! If you act as you say, why would you worry about this law? I know, it's the slippery slope theory...right? I just can't see it, my friend! :D I respect that you have concerns, but if you and others want to be taken seriously, you'll really need to ease off the conspiracy overtones because this truly make your argument a bit hard to swollow. :D

Link to comment

Your argument is exactly what I expected. Motorcyclists are responsible driver and the mere fact that they are in a much more fragile vehicle makes them no less safe than a hummer. It's the "other" drivers on the road that is the problem.

It's not the weaving in and out of traffic, its not the speeding, it's not the bees flying into helmets, it's not the possibility of one tire blowing. It's the "other" drivers on the road.

 

If seat belts makes the world safer then banning motorcycles would be the only way to keep the world safe, since there is no way to put a seat belt on a bike.

 

You will never see the hypocricy of your position so I won't continue.

 

I will say this. I used to ride a motorcycle as my primary transportation. I DO know of what I speak. I was taken out by a driver who turned right with his left blinker on. Guess what? He wasn't on a cell phone!

I also know the inherit dangers of motorcycles on the road. I have had a few wrecks and logged many thousands of miles. I know EXACTLY what riding a bike is all about.

 

Not owning a cell phone, yourself, pretty much removes your ability to objectively comment. You imply that EVERY cell phone user is a blooming idiot as soon as they answer their phone and that is simply not the case and most everyone knows it.

 

I want to add that I have seen and heard of so many motorcycle accidents where the motorcycle rider was the culprit and the result was death. Not only the death of the driver but the passenger as well.

In the summer, the per capita of accidents (and corresponding deaths) indicates that more people die because of motorcycles than cars.

 

Motorcycles need to be banned cuz motorcycles kill people, obviously not the riders because they are all responsible.

 

The boldened red comment, do you have ANY evidence to back this up? I am going to have to cry BULL! Actually, I call BULL on the whole post as it's just a bunch of sensationalistic rantings...

 

Since you say you've ridden a bike, tell me who's fault was the accident you were in? Do you suppose that driver was paying attention or was that driver driving distracted? :D

 

I also love how you lump bad riders in as if everyone rides in that manner...good try though! Just like there are irresponsible phone users, irresponsible drivers and so on, there are also irresponsible riders.

 

If you're going to continue the irrational postings, I'll just have to ignore you...

 

Since I don't own a phone, I have no right to an opinion? OK! Good try! Where did you see I said every? I said you can tell when a driver answers a phone...I would contend there are responsible users out there. Please stop being so sensationalistic.

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

 

One accident was because of another driver. The rest were either operator error or road conditions (which is still operator error).

I didn't crash my bike when my tire blew but it was a hairy ride.

 

As I said. I know from experience.

 

We need to ban motorcycles. They are more dangerous than cell phones or GPS devices.

Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

 

One accident was because of another driver. The rest were either operator error or road conditions (which is still operator error).

I didn't crash my bike when my tire blew but it was a hairy ride.

 

As I said. I know from experience.

 

We need to ban motorcycles. They are more dangerous than cell phones or GPS devices.

 

Please carry on with your "argument", let me know how it works for you! :D:D

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

Link to comment

Catching Wild Pigs

 

A chemistry professor in a large college had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab the Professor noticed one young man (exchange student) who kept rubbing his back, and stretching as if his back hurt.

 

The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist government.

 

In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked, 'Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'

 

The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man said this was no joke. '

 

You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground.

The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn.

When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming.

When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence.

They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in The last side.

The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.

 

Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn.

They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.

 

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening to America .

Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

 

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

 

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/m...statistics.html

2008 National Statistics

Motorcyclist fatalities reached 5,290 in 2008, accounting for 14% of total crash fatalities.

This is the 11th consecutive year that there has been an increase in motorcycle crash deaths.

The number of individuals injured in motorcycle crashes has decreased for the first time since 1998, declining 6.8%.

 

2007 National Statistics

In the United States, motorcycle accident deaths increased by 6.6%, accounting for almost one in eight motor vehicle deaths.

There were 5,154 motorcycle fatalities nationwide, and 2007 was the 10th straight year of increase.

Biker deaths hit an all-time low in 1997. Since that time, they have increased by 128%.

In 2007, 49% of bikers killed in crashes were age 40 or over.

31% of motorcycle crash fatalities occurred in the under 30-year-old group in 2007.

20% of crash fatalities occurred in the 30- to 39-year-old group in 2007.

27% percent of motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 percent.

In 2007, 36% of all bikers involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with 24% of passenger car drivers.

26% of bikers involved in fatal crashes were riding without a valid license in 2007.

 

2006 National Statistics

Per registered vehicle, the fatality rate for bikers in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants.

The injury rate for motorcycle riders was 1.2 times the injury rate for passenger car occupants.

In 2006, bikers accounted for 11% of total traffic fatalities.

In 2006, 4,810 motorcyclists were killed - an increase of 5% from 2005.

In 2006, 88,000 bikers were injured in accidents.

In 2006, 37% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents were speeding, compared with 23 percent for passenger car drivers.

Of all fatally injured motorcycle operators, 27% had blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher.

Bikers killed at night were three times more likely to have blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher than those killed during the day.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that for every 100 bikers killed while not wearing a helmet, 37 of their lives would have been saved if they were wearing a helmet.

Helmet use has declined by 20% over five years, from 2001 to 2006.

In Pennsylvania, there were 188 motorcycle-related fatalities in 2006.

Motorcycles are more likely to be involved in a fatal accident with a fixed object than another vehicle

 

I would lay all my money on the line betting that motorcycles don't account for 14% of all vehicles on the roads in the US

 

And it took less than 30 seconds to find this info.

Edited by bittsen
Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

 

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

 

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/m...statistics.html

2008 National Statistics

Motorcyclist fatalities reached 5,290 in 2008, accounting for 14% of total crash fatalities.

This is the 11th consecutive year that there has been an increase in motorcycle crash deaths.

The number of individuals injured in motorcycle crashes has decreased for the first time since 1998, declining 6.8%.

 

2007 National Statistics

In the United States, motorcycle accident deaths increased by 6.6%, accounting for almost one in eight motor vehicle deaths.

There were 5,154 motorcycle fatalities nationwide, and 2007 was the 10th straight year of increase.

Biker deaths hit an all-time low in 1997. Since that time, they have increased by 128%.

In 2007, 49% of bikers killed in crashes were age 40 or over.

31% of motorcycle crash fatalities occurred in the under 30-year-old group in 2007.

20% of crash fatalities occurred in the 30- to 39-year-old group in 2007.

27% percent of motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 percent.

In 2007, 36% of all bikers involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with 24% of passenger car drivers.

26% of bikers involved in fatal crashes were riding without a valid license in 2007.

 

2006 National Statistics

Per registered vehicle, the fatality rate for bikers in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants.

The injury rate for motorcycle riders was 1.2 times the injury rate for passenger car occupants.

In 2006, bikers accounted for 11% of total traffic fatalities.

In 2006, 4,810 motorcyclists were killed - an increase of 5% from 2005.

In 2006, 88,000 bikers were injured in accidents.

In 2006, 37% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents were speeding, compared with 23 percent for passenger car drivers.

Of all fatally injured motorcycle operators, 27% had blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher.

Bikers killed at night were three times more likely to have blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher than those killed during the day.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that for every 100 bikers killed while not wearing a helmet, 37 of their lives would have been saved if they were wearing a helmet.

Helmet use has declined by 20% over five years, from 2001 to 2006.

In Pennsylvania, there were 188 motorcycle-related fatalities in 2006.

Motorcycles are more likely to be involved in a fatal accident with a fixed object than another vehicle

 

I would lay all my money on the line betting that motorcycles don't account for 14% of all vehicles on the roads in the US

 

And it took less than 30 seconds to find this info.

 

wait...I told myself I wouldn't fuel this off-topic BSfest. Please, carry on!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

wait...I told myself I wouldn't fuel this off-topic BSfest. Please, carry on!

 

Reading the title of the OP, "Another new law" implicating that laws are being written to "protect the public", I believe proposing that motorcycles be banned because they are much too dangerous and cause injuries, is as on topic as cell phones. The only difference is you would fight against a ban on motorcycles but think its stupid for people to fight a ban on cell phones.

 

I wish they would have done a study to see how many people die each year due to distractions by cell phones or GPS devices. That study might even conclude that cell phones are less dangerous than motorcycles. In fact, considering that cell phones are a smaller subset of the automobile accidents which are MUCH less than motorcycle accidents, one would conclude that cell phones (as well as operating GPS devices) are, indeed, less hazardous to the population than motorcycles.

Edited by bittsen
Link to comment

wait...I told myself I wouldn't fuel this off-topic BSfest. Please, carry on!

 

Reading the title of the OP, "Another new law" implicating that laws are being written to "protect the public", I believe proposing that motorcycles be banned because they are much too dangerous and cause injuries, is as on topic as cell phones. The only difference is you would fight against a ban on motorcycles but think its stupid for people to fight a ban on cell phones.

 

I wish they would have done a study to see how many people die each year due to distractions by cell phones or GPS devices. That study might even conclude that cell phones are less dangerous than motorcycles. In fact, considering that cell phones are a smaller subset of the automobile accidents which are MUCH less than motorcycle accidents, one would conclude that cell phones (as well as operating GPS devices) are, indeed, less hazardous to the population than motorcycles.

 

You do realize we're in a GEOCACHING forums, right? But man, you sure are providing entertainment while discrediting yourself! THANKS! :D

Link to comment

My sister married a man from Guatemala, he moved here and became a citizen. But culture dies hard, and he never lost his quick temper.

 

To say that they were prone to argument is an understatement.

 

He had a motorcycle which for anti-theft purposes he kept tied with a logging chain to a tree in his front yard.

 

So one day I stopped in on the way home from work to visit with them and, as timing would have it, found them at the end of one of their raging arguments.

 

Just as I pulled up in the driveway Julio came storming out of the house, jumped on his bike and fired it up. Without saying anything to me he took off like a bat out of hell... until he got to the end of that chain through his front wheel! Can you say catapult?

 

I 'will never forget the look on that boy's face as he flew through the air, knowing that the back end of that motorcycle was following his path closely.

 

Just thought I would share that since, you know, it has about as much to do with geocaching as the rest of this thread. :D

Link to comment

My sister married a man from Guatemala, he moved here and became a citizen. But culture dies hard, and he never lost his quick temper.

 

To say that they were prone to argument is an understatement.

 

He had a motorcycle which for anti-theft purposes he kept tied with a logging chain to a tree in his front yard.

 

So one day I stopped in on the way home from work to visit with them and, as timing would have it, found them at the end of one of their raging arguments.

 

Just as I pulled up in the driveway Julio came storming out of the house, jumped on his bike and fired it up. Without saying anything to me he took off like a bat out of hell... until he got to the end of that chain through his front wheel! Can you say catapult?

 

I 'will never forget the look on that boy's face as he flew through the air, knowing that the back end of that motorcycle was following his path closely.

 

Just thought I would share that since, you know, it has about as much to do with geocaching as the rest of this thread. :D

Do you mind if I quote this story in the MC forum I frequent?

Link to comment

My sister married a man from Guatemala, he moved here and became a citizen. But culture dies hard, and he never lost his quick temper.

 

To say that they were prone to argument is an understatement.

 

He had a motorcycle which for anti-theft purposes he kept tied with a logging chain to a tree in his front yard.

 

So one day I stopped in on the way home from work to visit with them and, as timing would have it, found them at the end of one of their raging arguments.

 

Just as I pulled up in the driveway Julio came storming out of the house, jumped on his bike and fired it up. Without saying anything to me he took off like a bat out of hell... until he got to the end of that chain through his front wheel! Can you say catapult?

 

I 'will never forget the look on that boy's face as he flew through the air, knowing that the back end of that motorcycle was following his path closely.

 

Just thought I would share that since, you know, it has about as much to do with geocaching as the rest of this thread. :D

Do you mind if I quote this story in the MC forum I frequent?

Go for it! It was a hoot. If you need a conclusion he wasn't hurt, just a bit scuffed up, as it threw him much further than the motorcycle... unless you count injuries to his pride and macho image!

Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

 

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

 

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/m...statistics.html

2008 National Statistics

Motorcyclist fatalities reached 5,290 in 2008, accounting for 14% of total crash fatalities.

This is the 11th consecutive year that there has been an increase in motorcycle crash deaths.

The number of individuals injured in motorcycle crashes has decreased for the first time since 1998, declining 6.8%.

 

2007 National Statistics

In the United States, motorcycle accident deaths increased by 6.6%, accounting for almost one in eight motor vehicle deaths.

There were 5,154 motorcycle fatalities nationwide, and 2007 was the 10th straight year of increase.

Biker deaths hit an all-time low in 1997. Since that time, they have increased by 128%.

In 2007, 49% of bikers killed in crashes were age 40 or over.

31% of motorcycle crash fatalities occurred in the under 30-year-old group in 2007.

20% of crash fatalities occurred in the 30- to 39-year-old group in 2007.

27% percent of motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 percent.

In 2007, 36% of all bikers involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with 24% of passenger car drivers.

26% of bikers involved in fatal crashes were riding without a valid license in 2007.

 

2006 National Statistics

Per registered vehicle, the fatality rate for bikers in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants.

The injury rate for motorcycle riders was 1.2 times the injury rate for passenger car occupants.

In 2006, bikers accounted for 11% of total traffic fatalities.

In 2006, 4,810 motorcyclists were killed - an increase of 5% from 2005.

In 2006, 88,000 bikers were injured in accidents.

In 2006, 37% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents were speeding, compared with 23 percent for passenger car drivers.

Of all fatally injured motorcycle operators, 27% had blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher.

Bikers killed at night were three times more likely to have blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher than those killed during the day.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that for every 100 bikers killed while not wearing a helmet, 37 of their lives would have been saved if they were wearing a helmet.

Helmet use has declined by 20% over five years, from 2001 to 2006.

In Pennsylvania, there were 188 motorcycle-related fatalities in 2006.

Motorcycles are more likely to be involved in a fatal accident with a fixed object than another vehicle

 

I would lay all my money on the line betting that motorcycles don't account for 14% of all vehicles on the roads in the US

 

And it took less than 30 seconds to find this info.

Ah. I was looking for better sources than ambulance chaser advertisements. My bad, I guess.

 

Searching for the exact same wording and limiting it to nhtsa.gov, I did finally find that guy's source: NHTSA

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment

My sister married a man from Guatemala, he moved here and became a citizen. But culture dies hard, and he never lost his quick temper.

 

To say that they were prone to argument is an understatement.

 

He had a motorcycle which for anti-theft purposes he kept tied with a logging chain to a tree in his front yard.

 

So one day I stopped in on the way home from work to visit with them and, as timing would have it, found them at the end of one of their raging arguments.

 

Just as I pulled up in the driveway Julio came storming out of the house, jumped on his bike and fired it up. Without saying anything to me he took off like a bat out of hell... until he got to the end of that chain through his front wheel! Can you say catapult?

 

I 'will never forget the look on that boy's face as he flew through the air, knowing that the back end of that motorcycle was following his path closely.

 

Just thought I would share that since, you know, it has about as much to do with geocaching as the rest of this thread. :D

Do you mind if I quote this story in the MC forum I frequent?

Go for it! It was a hoot. If you need a conclusion he wasn't hurt, just a bit scuffed up, as it threw him much further than the motorcycle... unless you count injuries to his pride and macho image!

 

It is a common occurrence for a rider to fall victim to his own anti-theft devices. Most often with disc locks that attach through the break disc. This almost always occurs in full view of your buddies or the hot chicks the rider is trying to impress. Murphy's law you know. If taking of fast it can do major, sometimes irreparable, damage to the bike but seldom serious injury to the rider.

 

Before you ask, only once. Only my dog saw it happen so not all my luck had left me that morning. :D

Link to comment

If cell phones and GPS devices are to be outlawed because they distract the driver too much, I'm wondering how much of the other distractions will be outlawed?

 

Will women get fined for putting on make up while driving? I hope so.

Will billboards be taken down because they're designed to make drivers take their eyes and minds off of the driving they're doing? I hope so.

 

I hope the Gubberment would hurry up and remove all the risks in my life and keep me perfectly safe.

Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

 

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

 

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/m...statistics.html

2008 National Statistics

Motorcyclist fatalities reached 5,290 in 2008, accounting for 14% of total crash fatalities.

This is the 11th consecutive year that there has been an increase in motorcycle crash deaths.

The number of individuals injured in motorcycle crashes has decreased for the first time since 1998, declining 6.8%.

 

2007 National Statistics

In the United States, motorcycle accident deaths increased by 6.6%, accounting for almost one in eight motor vehicle deaths.

There were 5,154 motorcycle fatalities nationwide, and 2007 was the 10th straight year of increase.

Biker deaths hit an all-time low in 1997. Since that time, they have increased by 128%.

In 2007, 49% of bikers killed in crashes were age 40 or over.

31% of motorcycle crash fatalities occurred in the under 30-year-old group in 2007.

20% of crash fatalities occurred in the 30- to 39-year-old group in 2007.

27% percent of motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 percent.

In 2007, 36% of all bikers involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with 24% of passenger car drivers.

26% of bikers involved in fatal crashes were riding without a valid license in 2007.

 

2006 National Statistics

Per registered vehicle, the fatality rate for bikers in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants.

The injury rate for motorcycle riders was 1.2 times the injury rate for passenger car occupants.

In 2006, bikers accounted for 11% of total traffic fatalities.

In 2006, 4,810 motorcyclists were killed - an increase of 5% from 2005.

In 2006, 88,000 bikers were injured in accidents.

In 2006, 37% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents were speeding, compared with 23 percent for passenger car drivers.

Of all fatally injured motorcycle operators, 27% had blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher.

Bikers killed at night were three times more likely to have blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher than those killed during the day.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that for every 100 bikers killed while not wearing a helmet, 37 of their lives would have been saved if they were wearing a helmet.

Helmet use has declined by 20% over five years, from 2001 to 2006.

In Pennsylvania, there were 188 motorcycle-related fatalities in 2006.

Motorcycles are more likely to be involved in a fatal accident with a fixed object than another vehicle

 

I would lay all my money on the line betting that motorcycles don't account for 14% of all vehicles on the roads in the US

 

And it took less than 30 seconds to find this info.

Ah. I was looking for better sources than ambulance chaser advertisements. My bad, I guess.

 

Searching for the exact same wording and limiting it to nhtsa.gov, I did finally find that guy's source: NHTSA

 

So are you now admitting my stats are valid?

 

Here are the ones from Kansas

http://www.ksdot.org/burtransplan/prodinfo...ick%20Facts.pdf

2-Wheeled Motor Vehicles 49 deaths out of 416 total for the year. Thats over 12%. Also, keep in mind that motorcycles don't drive year round, cars do. So the stat for road time, if calculated, would likely top 40%

Link to comment

If cell phones and GPS devices are to be outlawed because they distract the driver too much, I'm wondering how much of the other distractions will be outlawed?

 

Will women get fined for putting on make up while driving? I hope so.

Will billboards be taken down because they're designed to make drivers take their eyes and minds off of the driving they're doing? I hope so.

 

I hope the Gubberment would hurry up and remove all the risks in my life and keep me perfectly safe.

Why should the government limit my speed, or how much I drink before I drive, or how old I have to be before I get a license? Heck, why should there be a license? Let anyone drive in any condition they feel like. If they hurt someone, then we'll deal with it.

 

 

Before anyone says "How dare you compare drunk driving to talking on the cell phone!!", that's not my point. My point is, you can make a slippery slope argument either way.

Link to comment

 

I said per capita.

That means that for every 1000 car drivers, and 1000 motorcycle riders, there is a higher percentage of accidents. ( I should clarify to say MAJOR accidents) and deaths involving motorcycles than cars.

Do I have any proof? I could go find a link, anyone can, because it's a well known statistic.

I think this is a ploy to distract people from posting, because I can't find it.

 

http://www.motorcycle-accidents.com/pages/stats.html

 

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/auto-accident/m...statistics.html

2008 National Statistics

Motorcyclist fatalities reached 5,290 in 2008, accounting for 14% of total crash fatalities.

This is the 11th consecutive year that there has been an increase in motorcycle crash deaths.

The number of individuals injured in motorcycle crashes has decreased for the first time since 1998, declining 6.8%.

 

2007 National Statistics

In the United States, motorcycle accident deaths increased by 6.6%, accounting for almost one in eight motor vehicle deaths.

There were 5,154 motorcycle fatalities nationwide, and 2007 was the 10th straight year of increase.

Biker deaths hit an all-time low in 1997. Since that time, they have increased by 128%.

In 2007, 49% of bikers killed in crashes were age 40 or over.

31% of motorcycle crash fatalities occurred in the under 30-year-old group in 2007.

20% of crash fatalities occurred in the 30- to 39-year-old group in 2007.

27% percent of motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over 0.08 percent.

In 2007, 36% of all bikers involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with 24% of passenger car drivers.

26% of bikers involved in fatal crashes were riding without a valid license in 2007.

 

2006 National Statistics

Per registered vehicle, the fatality rate for bikers in 2006 was 5.5 times the fatality rate for passenger car occupants.

The injury rate for motorcycle riders was 1.2 times the injury rate for passenger car occupants.

In 2006, bikers accounted for 11% of total traffic fatalities.

In 2006, 4,810 motorcyclists were killed - an increase of 5% from 2005.

In 2006, 88,000 bikers were injured in accidents.

In 2006, 37% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal accidents were speeding, compared with 23 percent for passenger car drivers.

Of all fatally injured motorcycle operators, 27% had blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher.

Bikers killed at night were three times more likely to have blood alcohol concentrations of .08 g/dL or higher than those killed during the day.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that for every 100 bikers killed while not wearing a helmet, 37 of their lives would have been saved if they were wearing a helmet.

Helmet use has declined by 20% over five years, from 2001 to 2006.

In Pennsylvania, there were 188 motorcycle-related fatalities in 2006.

Motorcycles are more likely to be involved in a fatal accident with a fixed object than another vehicle

 

I would lay all my money on the line betting that motorcycles don't account for 14% of all vehicles on the roads in the US

 

And it took less than 30 seconds to find this info.

Ah. I was looking for better sources than ambulance chaser advertisements. My bad, I guess.

 

Searching for the exact same wording and limiting it to nhtsa.gov, I did finally find that guy's source: NHTSA

 

So are you now admitting my stats are valid?

I didn't check them all but yes, I accept the bolded one. But my original challenge was only half-serious anyway.

Link to comment

I didn't check them all but yes, I accept the bolded one. But my original challenge was only half-serious anyway.

No worries.

I don't like being called a liar. I tend to want to prove the truth.

Now, I have to go to the store, I'll just put on my make-up the way.

Link to comment

I didn't check them all but yes, I accept the bolded one. But my original challenge was only half-serious anyway.

No worries.

I don't like being called a liar. I tend to want to prove the truth.

Now, I have to go to the store, I'll just put on my make-up the way.

No, didn't mean that.

Link to comment

What the **** has this thread got to do with geocaching anymore? It was a very thin line in the original posting, but it as wandered waaaayyyy of since then. We are now nearing the end of page #4. Meanwhile, a question of mine having to do directly (admittedly IMO) with geocaching, has been moved to the GPS and Tech forum where it is dying a fast and painful death for lack of interest.

 

Political discussions like this are great. But they are not about geocaching and not about personal opinions about the legal system. There are other websites for that.

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

What the **** has this thread got to do with geocaching anymore. It was a very thin line in the original posting, but it as wandered waaaayyyy of since then. Meanwhile, a thread of mine having to do directly (IMO) with geocaching, has been moved to the GPS and Tech forum where it is dying a fast and painful death.

 

Political discussions like this are great. But they are not about geocaching.

 

This thread is about new laws. Especially laws pertaining to distractions and dangerous driving and/or drivers. It was all on topic with the title.

 

This thread was not about whining because you aren't getting enough attention today.

Now go sit in the corner!

Link to comment

What the **** has this thread got to do with geocaching anymore. It was a very thin line in the original posting, but it as wandered waaaayyyy of since then. Meanwhile, a thread of mine having to do directly (IMO) with geocaching, has been moved to the GPS and Tech forum where it is dying a fast and painful death.

 

Political discussions like this are great. But they are not about geocaching.

 

This thread is about new laws. Especially laws pertaining to distractions and dangerous driving and/or drivers. It was all on topic with the title.

 

This thread was not about whining because you aren't getting enough attention today.

Now go sit in the corner!

 

I would consider that to be inflammatory, and a personal atttack if I wasn't certain that you forgot the smiley. You know that I'm not whining "because I'm not getting enough attention today". I am complaining that off-topic policital debates go on for pages, while topical threads get moved to forums where there is little or no interest in them.

 

An apology for your lack of a smiley would be appreciated, but not expected.

Link to comment

What the **** has this thread got to do with geocaching anymore. It was a very thin line in the original posting, but it as wandered waaaayyyy of since then. Meanwhile, a thread of mine having to do directly (IMO) with geocaching, has been moved to the GPS and Tech forum where it is dying a fast and painful death.

 

Political discussions like this are great. But they are not about geocaching.

 

This thread is about new laws. Especially laws pertaining to distractions and dangerous driving and/or drivers. It was all on topic with the title.

 

This thread was not about whining because you aren't getting enough attention today.

Now go sit in the corner!

 

I would consider that to be inflammatory, and a personal atttack if I wasn't certain that you forgot the smiley. You know that I'm not whining "because I'm not getting enough attention today". I am complaining that off-topic policital debates go on for pages, while topical threads get moved to forums where there is little or no interest in them.

 

An apology for your lack of a smiley would be appreciated, but not expected.

 

Darn, I keep fprgetting the smileys! Flog me with a feather!

 

ist2_437828_giant_smiley_big_smile.gif

Link to comment

 

Darn, I keep fprgetting the smileys! Flog me with a feather!

 

ist2_437828_giant_smiley_big_smile.gif

 

Thanks for getting this thread back on topic! If I didn't know that you were such a light-hearted guy with a huge and generous sense of humor, I might have taken offense at a remark like that, but I now know that you are one of the Good Guys and while your White Hat may be a bit dusty, you are trying. But please... try harder, OK? I know that you can do it!

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...