Tragedy

AntonLargiader · Jul 19, 2015

Realistically, education is what is going to cut through the crap. There are way too many political irons in this fire to achieve a solution that way, and while there are some insurance-related concessions that I personally would consider acceptable, that is a really slippery slope.

In cases like this one, I wonder if the survivors think he was killed by riding a motorcycle or by not wearing appropriate protection. There will probably be some well-meaning friend who assures the widow, "He would have died either way" thus driving a spike through the education angle.

A neighbor's friend was killed in a MC crash some years ago. She said, "He did just what they told him to do and laid it down, but he still died." She wasn't a rider; there was no point pursuing it.

36654 · Jul 19, 2015

DennisDarrow said:
Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's from a guy that was part of the "right" to not wear a helmet back in the whenever. It was a cause that many BMWMOAers were part of and there was just as mixed of reaction as there is to this. What is comical is that all of this ATGizmo stuff back in the whenever was a set of leathers and a DOT helmet, that we FOUGHT.....FOUGHT to have the RIGHT to NOT wear. This was in a time that govt was not half as intrusive as it is now, and folks are trying to give that hard fought for RIGHT, back to the govt......The pendulum does swing doesn't it.

Your recollection has nothing in common with my memory of the past. I had the leather and then the textile, but always with as good a helmet as I could buy. Most all of the other BMW riders did the same.

If you other folks were off having constitution study groups, I never noticed.

Just saying what I recall since 1985.......

labbats · Jul 19, 2015

Do I shake my head whenever I see someone riding without a helmet? Sure. But I would never ask the government to force a law upon them... other than denying medical claims in the event of an accident.

Let people make their own choices but also let them feel the weight of those decisions when they end in a mishap. I have no interest in a nanny state.

dennisdarrow · Jul 19, 2015

36654 said:
Your recollection has nothing in common with my memory of the past. I had the leather and then the textile, but always with as good a helmet as I could buy. Most all of the other BMW riders did the same.
i
If you other folks were off having constitution study groups, I never noticed.

Just saying what I recall since 1985.......

Love them youngsters who dispute what you KNOW and then disqualify themselves by being to new...........talking the 60's and 70's here Bud..... It's also where and when ABATE got it's start as a break-off from the AMA......If these old brain cells are working right, this period was at a time when outlaws, BMW type folks, AMA, and independents were actually working together towards getting rid of helmet law state by state.

Yes, new agers, there once was a time when most states had a helmet law that required ALL people to wear helmets. This was considered as govt requiring one to do an act that they had no right to tell a person to do...........Or pretty close to that...........

Yes, MOST wore a helmet for sure.....A Bell open face was state of the art.........But....Folks were fighting to get rid of the Govt intrusive laws that required.....that's the operative word....REQUIRED all to wear a helmet. California was pretty much the only state that DID not require this.

By the way, most folks back then RODE, not drove a bike, were called a rider, and folks who were part of the "brotherhood" were BIKERS....This was kind of a dubious honor earned by being a good ol boy.............Maybe this is part of the "biker code" referred above.........ATGizmo was maybe a leather jacket, levis, and for sure at least a denim jacket. This is so funny talking about the old stuff that it should be another thread.........God bless.......Dennis

jcj78 · Jul 19, 2015

labbats said:
Do I shake my head whenever I see someone riding without a helmet? Sure. But I would never ask the government to force a law upon them... other than denying medical claims in the event of an accident.

Let people make their own choices but also let them feel the weight of those decisions when they end in a mishap. I have no interest in a nanny state.

You feel the same way about seat belt laws? How about weight limits for trucks?

Do whatever you like on your own property. On a public roadway you are beholden to the public and the rules they set about their roadways.

jcj78 · Jul 19, 2015

DennisDarrow said:
Love them youngsters who dispute what you KNOW and then disqualify themselves by being to new...........talking the 60's and 70's here Bud..... It's also where and when ABATE got it's start as a break-off from the AMA......If these old brain cells are working right, this period was at a time when outlaws, BMW type folks, AMA, and independents were actually working together towards getting rid of helmet law state by state.
Yes, new agers, there once was a time when most states had a helmet law that required ALL people to wear helmets. This was considered as govt requiring one to do an act that they had no right to tell a person to do...........Or pretty close to that...........

By the way, most folks back then RODE, not drove a bike, were called a rider, and folks who were part of the "brotherhood" were BIKERS....This was kind of a dubious honor earned by being a good ol boy.............Maybe this is part of the "biker code" referred above.........ATGizmo was maybe a leather jacket, levis, and for sure at least a denim jacket. This is so funny talking about the old stuff that it should be another thread.........God bless.......Dennis

It ain't the 60's and 70's, or even the ME ME 80's. Hell, I was born in 1978, and I'm no spring chicken. I'm closer to 40 than 30, and some of my friends got kids that are driving.

Old people did lots of ridiculous things during the time period you're describing. It has taken nearly thirty years to dig us out of the holes they got us into. Never fear: We "New Agers" can and will put in the work necessary to save us all from the derelictions of the not-to-distant past. And the foot draggers will either get hauled along or they'll have to finally stop talking about going Galt and actually do it, which wouldn't be too smart now that most of em draw SS and Medicare.

dennisdarrow · Jul 19, 2015

jcj78 said:
It ain't the 60's and 70's, or even the ME ME 80's. Hell, I was born in 1978, and I'm no spring chicken. I'm closer to 40 than 30, and some of my friends got kids that are driving.

Old people did lots of ridiculous things during the time period you're describing. It has taken nearly thirty years to dig us out of the holes they got us into. Never fear: We "New Agers" can and will put in the work necessary to save us all from the derelictions of the not-to-distant past. And the foot draggers will either get hauled along or they'll have to finally stop talking about going Galt and actually do it, which wouldn't be too smart now that most of em draw SS and Medicare.

Surely not out to argue or know everything......NOR put down someone who obviously does............Rant on
This is an example of the "NEW" BMWMOA????

jcj78 · Jul 19, 2015

changes of the guard are always difficult.

This little gem always seems to be some consolation for the sunsetters:

“It is said that what is called "the spirit of an age" is something to which one cannot return. That this spirit gradually dissipates is due to the world's coming to an end. For this reason, although one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation.”
― Tsunetomo Yamamoto, Hagakure

See? Uppity youngsters been aggravating has-beens for at least hundreds, and probably thousands or ten-thousands of years. Ain't nothin' changed.

EvryDayRide · Jul 19, 2015

You know, after 32 years of working in the Fire Service here in California, I have learned from first hand experience that helmets save lives and seat belts save lives. I have witnessed it and all of the data proves this point. It is a law here to utilize these safety measures. For some reason, people elect to not protect themselves and they pay the ultimate price with their life.

On my trip to Montana 2 weeks ago, it was strange seeing so many people in several states with out helmets. No helmet law. While I was driving it dawned on me that if you are capable of getting a license to drive, you should have enough sense to decide how much risk you want to take in this life? If you don't care enough about yourself, then why should I care about you? If someone does not wear a helmet or seat belt, they are a danger to themselves only. I guess I am getting more callous in my old age? People die every day in this country because they did not use the safety equipment available to them. It is sad. However, it was also their choice.....

John

greenwald · Jul 19, 2015

Bud said:
Why?

Because for decades, we tritely stated "Darwin will sort it out." That isn't happening.

Because for decades, we ignored ABATE and AMA agendas and lobbyists, thinking they would just be 'flashes in the pan," They weren't.

Because we thought if we set a good example with ATGATT, the masses would follow our lead. They didn't.

Because we believed that as the 'Harley crowd' aged, they would come to their senses. Not the case.

Because education hasn't made even a dent in making better choices and decisions. A false sense of security.

Because we all pay ridiculous insurance rates and property taxes to cover the ignorant or paranoid. Poor economics.

Because ................ if we don't start getting aggressively involved in cleaning up our decaying image, the non-riding public and politicians will eventually get around to doing it for us. Then we'll all wonder why we didn't see that coming. :banghead

Bud · Jul 19, 2015

Kevin,

On the road. Will give a response tomorrow when not typing on my phone

selil · Jul 20, 2015

I am a ATGATT kind of rider. I strenuously argue against legal remedies to force adherence to wearing a helmet or other "safety" legislation without it being tied to the vehicle or licensure.

Most people who argue to limit or restrict the behaviors of other people have forgotten the basic tenets of freedom and liberty. It is exactly the concept that you can do stuff that is stupid, dangerous, and not normal for society that is protected. In any attempt to protect people from themselves one persons concept of risk is used to sacrifice another persons freedom. I can both understand the contrary nature of wanting to protect people from themselves and allowing people to do things I think are not safe.

A principle of national level policy agendas is incremental legislation. At the state level you see mandated seat belts in cars, then secondary stop criteria to ticket for not using, then primary stop criteria, and finally criminalization if in an accident and not using. The incremental nature of change in the policy happens over decades. A little more won't hurt. We're just trying to save people from themselves. The same principle is used in the opposite direction like we're seeing with marijuana laws at the state level.

The enactment of any law is at its most basic level an infringement on the freedom of somebody. When the power of the state is utilized to regulate through statute liberty pays the price first.

Consider the principle of incremental legislation. Helmet laws were the rule of the nation for awhile and were gaining traction. Around the same period government organizations were doing research like the famous Clayborn Motorcycle. Federal studies were commissioned like the Hurt Report. The helmet law debate was translated to health insurers and Ruger firearms as an example banned employees from riding motorcycles. The State of New Mexico said if you were stupid enough to ride a motorcycle then you were automatically required to be an organ donor. The examples of safety and liberty issues ignited by the helmet law debate are enormous.

I know most people won't understand this but I'm against helmet laws because I love motorcycling. Helmet laws are one of several key stones in the incremental legislative process to ending the motorcycle itself on American roads. Most people say that will never happen. It is apocalyptic. The examples of safety related consumer transitions away from products are also significant. In general people look at other people and don't respect their choices and call them stupid for taking chances. Meanwhile their equally risky choices are adventure.

I'd rather be able to make my own choices.

36654 · Jul 20, 2015

greenwald said:
Because for decades, we tritely stated "Darwin will sort it out." That isn't happening.

Because for decades, we ignored ABATE and AMA agendas and lobbyists, thinking they would just be 'flashes in the pan," They weren't.

Because we thought if we set a good example with ATGATT, the masses would follow our lead. They didn't.

Because we believed that as the 'Harley crowd' aged, they would come to their senses. Not the case.

Because education hasn't made even a dent in making better choices and decisions. A false sense of security.

Because we all pay ridiculous insurance rates and property taxes to cover the ignorant or paranoid. Poor economics.

Because ................ if we don't start getting aggressively involved in cleaning up our decaying image, the non-riding public and politicians will eventually get around to doing it for us. Then we'll all wonder why we didn't see that coming.

Jeez........I can't argue with 99% of what you wrote. That's unusual, as you know.

However, why do you feel your property taxes are impacted by poor safety choices? It's federal and state income taxes that pay for the Medicaid that will cover long term care or Social Security that covers disability.

36654 · Jul 20, 2015

DennisDarrow said:
was at a time when outlaws, BMW type folks, AMA, and independents were actually working together towards getting rid of helmet law state by state.

Hmmm.........BMW MOA was founded in 1972. And, I'm greatly surprised to find that it was our charter to eliminate helmet laws.

What a fool I have been to be a member...........

dennisdarrow · Jul 20, 2015

jcj78 said:
Uppity youngsters been aggravating has-beens for at least hundreds, and probably thousands or ten-thousands of years. Ain't nothin' changed.[/QUOTE

Surely NOT out to argue on here. If that is what you need on here move along to one who will...NOT going to be rude even when it is past due.....I came on here merely to post a bit of how it was and how we got to where we are now. YOU or others can twist what I say easily to conform to those thought patterns of arguing and conflict.

Really don't know where or how this thread of a tragic loss of life and how a family will be scarred by that for several generations got twisted into how "uppity youngsters" use argument and rudeness about something to prove their point........For myself and possibly others it is a shame that change is approached this way.....It is kinda like walking into a solemn moment in a funeral service and saying that you don't like the way the eulogy is given and are gonna change it just to show how powerful you can be with words......

As a former certified MSF instructor and program director, I would once again expound that: of course HELMETS SHOULD BE WORN and even more effective HEAVY DUTY LICENSING AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS SHOULD BE MANDATED by effective legislation. It is up to the democratic process for STATES to decide this NOT A FEDERAL MANDATE.

If the BOD, which should follow the path of the majority of the membership of the BMWMOA, decides somehow to dedicate scarce funding to promote this movement it is truly their decision to do such. For me, we have an already established method, means, and funded way to do this. The BMWMOA Foundation is actually, to me, mandated to promote such knowledge and education to those who can make decisions which establish laws to educate the public as it concerns motorcycling. Thus, once again, BMW folks can become leaders in the field of safety education.........God bless........Dennis

dennisdarrow · Jul 20, 2015

36654 said:
Hmmm.........BMW MOA was founded in 1972. And, I'm greatly surprised to find that it was our charter to eliminate helmet laws.

What a fool I have been to be a member...........

Read what is said...........BMW folks....surely NOT BMWMOA.....Read Bud, not twist words to suit what you want it to say for your arguments sake..........READ....not TWIST

dennisdarrow · Jul 20, 2015

selil said:
I am a ATGATT kind of rider. I strenuously argue against legal remedies to force adherence to wearing a helmet or other "safety" legislation without it being tied to the vehicle or licensure.

Most people who argue to limit or restrict the behaviors of other people have forgotten the basic tenets of freedom and liberty. It is exactly the concept that you can do stuff that is stupid, dangerous, and not normal for society that is protected. In any attempt to protect people from themselves one persons concept of risk is used to sacrifice another persons freedom. I can both understand the contrary nature of wanting to protect people from themselves and allowing people to do things I think are not safe.

A principle of national level policy agendas is incremental legislation. At the state level you see mandated seat belts in cars, then secondary stop criteria to ticket for not using, then primary stop criteria, and finally criminalization if in an accident and not using. The incremental nature of change in the policy happens over decades. A little more won't hurt. We're just trying to save people from themselves. The same principle is used in the opposite direction like we're seeing with marijuana laws at the state level.

The enactment of any law is at its most basic level an infringement on the freedom of somebody. When the power of the state is utilized to regulate through statute liberty pays the price first.

Consider the principle of incremental legislation. Helmet laws were the rule of the nation for awhile and were gaining traction. Around the same period government organizations were doing research like the famous Clayborn Motorcycle. Federal studies were commissioned like the Hurt Report. The helmet law debate was translated to health insurers and Ruger firearms as an example banned employees from riding motorcycles. The State of New Mexico said if you were stupid enough to ride a motorcycle then you were automatically required to be an organ donor. The examples of safety and liberty issues ignited by the helmet law debate are enormous.

I know most people won't understand this but I'm against helmet laws because I love motorcycling. Helmet laws are one of several key stones in the incremental legislative process to ending the motorcycle itself on American roads. Most people say that will never happen. It is apocalyptic. The examples of safety related consumer transitions away from products are also significant. In general people look at other people and don't respect their choices and call them stupid for taking chances. Meanwhile their equally risky choices are adventure.

I'd rather be able to make my own choices.

Thanks.....eloquence that I shall never have..........God bless.......Dennis

mikegalbicka · Jul 20, 2015

selil said:
I'd rather be able to make my own choices.

F.W. Boreham — 'We make our decisions, and then our decisions turn around and make us'

More good quotes on "choices" if interested:
http://www.notable-quotes.com/c/choice_quotes_ii.html

greenwald · Jul 20, 2015

36654 said:
Jeez........I can't argue with 99% of what you wrote. That's unusual, as you know.

However, why do you feel your property taxes are impacted by poor safety choices? It's federal and state income taxes that pay for the Medicaid that will cover long term care or Social Security that covers disability.

Indeed - that is unusual. But hey - it's a forum - disagreement is a cornerstone, so NP.

I mention property taxes as they fund the state coffers and money from there is earmarked for silly, ineffective billboards about motorcycle education, funds the state motorcycle training program (fraught with misdirection and wasted $$$) and rarely gets directed towards aggressive enforcement of existing motorcycle laws.

greenwald · Jul 20, 2015

Bud said:
Kevin,

On the road. Will give a response tomorrow when not typing on my phone

Not a problem. Look forward to your sage commentary.

Ride well, safe and aware.

Tragedy

Active member

New member

New member

#4869 Earned Lifetime mem

New member

New member

#4869 Earned Lifetime mem

New member

John

New member

It is what it is.

Motorcycle Rider

New member

New member

#4869 Earned Lifetime mem

#4869 Earned Lifetime mem

#4869 Earned Lifetime mem

Back in the saddle again

New member

New member

Similar threads