Safest / Most Dangerous States In Which To Ride

https://quotewizard.com/news/posts/dangerous-states-for-motorcycles

https://missoulian.com/news/local/m...ource=infinity-scroll-summary-siderail-latest

Y’all be careful down there Gail.

Dang Kevin, how many bikes do y'all own now.

Crazy stats I would never imagine. In Florida and California they should be running over each other.

In Florida and California they should be running over each other.

Click to expand...

Not even close. We all KNOW the cagers are out to get us when we climb on a bike; really heightens that situational awareness.

Montana being last... to be expected. There's only like what, three bikes in Montana, and they can only ride when the weather's above freezing (something like 18-24 hours a years).

lmo1131 said:

Not even close. We all KNOW the cagers are out to get us when we climb on a bike; really heightens that situational awareness.

Montana being last... to be expected. There's only like what, three bikes in Montana, and they can only ride when the weather's above freezing (something like 18-24 hours a years).

Click to expand...

That was the crazy stat...Montana has almost as many as TX

Using the number of registered motorcycles compared to the number of fatalities in a state is one way to rank states, but not the best way to determine risk. A better way would be to compare fatalities to miles ridden. Montana is Harley Land and I would wager that the miles ridden per registered bike are lower than average. We would likely not be at the bottom of the list when computed in such a fashion.

Using this study indicates that the best way to do increase safety is to sell more motorcycles.

yeah the statistics,lies, and damn statistics argument can be made...however that quote goes

Some of the ways these lists are made often has me doing a head scratch.
And the MT article stating all the things considered for motorcycle ownership in Big Sky may skew the numbers.

Any fatality is too many, and most of us travelers and certain states residents know where to be even more vigilant or concerned.

Helmet laws

It is impossible to consider individual States' impacts (locality) without separating it from the helmet issue, e.g., a rider with a helmet would do fine in many of the "high risk" States. The top tier injury states listed are those without helmet laws.

jkjohnson said:

It is impossible to consider individual States' impacts (locality) without separating it from the helmet issue, e.g., a rider with a helmet would do fine in many of the "high risk" States. The top tier injury states listed are those without helmet laws.

Click to expand...

Helmets are not required in MT, nor is insurance of any kind required on motorcycles.

Exactly Kevin, and all the others who have identified helmet laws, etc.

Unfortunately, it is basically a study into which state has the most fatalities per registered bike vs riding miles, etc., and nothing more! How many riders only travel in their own state? Are they counting those deaths out of state against the bikes registered in the State where the death occurred? Another waste of time and money from my perspective.

The states with the two highest # of registered bikes are California and Florida and yet they rank 20th and 4th. From what I read, I'm wondering what the actual value of the study was and what real purpose it could serve in the format it was conducted.

I live in an area where I can typically only ride 6-7 months of the year, but that doesn't stop me from riding in Florida, California, etc., during the months I can't ride at home. I live in Nova Scotia, Canada, but so far this month my bike has been in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Maine, New Hampshire, and Massittuchets. My bike is registered in Nova Scotia, but if I have an accident/fatality (heaven forbid) the bike's place of registration and the # of registered bikes in that state have far less to do with that accident than the number of motorcycles been ridden over x-miles.

If a state has any amount of motorcycle tourism than the study is absolutely meaningless. The MOA Rally has very low numbers compared to others like Sturgis (700,000), Laconia, Daytona Bike Week, etc.) but every year hundreds of thousands of riders travel to all of them, most riding outside the state their bike is registered in.

Two thoughts.... Correct me if I am wrong . 1. Montana is an LLC tax haven state. Tens of thousands of those motorcycles have probably never touched Montana pavement. 2. I think Montana treats side by sides like motorcycles for registration purposes. If so, that would vastly overstate the true number of bikes.

Safest

Safest state when I pay attention to my surroundings keep an eye on other drivers ride safely, most dangerous state when I don’t

henzilla said:

yeah the statistics,lies, and damn statistics argument can be made...however that quote goes

Some of the ways these lists are made often has me doing a head scratch.
And the MT article stating all the things considered for motorcycle ownership in Big Sky may skew the numbers.

Any fatality is too many, and most of us travelers and certain states residents know where to be even more vigilant or concerned.

Click to expand...

Its: "There are Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics"

A motorcycle registration in Montana is permanent, forever, never expires; owners never need to get new license plate tabs. The state has no idea how many registered bikes are actually still on the road. There are plans afoot to require an annual fee.... current owners are not overly supportive of the idea.

henzilla said:

yeah the statistics,lies, and damn statistics argument can be made...however that quote goes

Some of the ways these lists are made often has me doing a head scratch.
And the MT article stating all the things considered for motorcycle ownership in Big Sky may skew the numbers.

Any fatality is too many, and most of us travelers and certain states residents know where to be even more vigilant or concerned.

Click to expand...

Old saying about statistics; Garbage In-Garbage Out. The conclusions are only as good as the information you base those conclusions on. Unfortunately too many people today reach a conclusion first, then only look for the stats that will support that conclusion.


Except for one, Any motorcycle fatality of one too many. That is true, regardless of any stats.

jkjohnson said:

It is impossible to consider individual States' impacts (locality) without separating it from the helmet issue, e.g., a rider with a helmet would do fine in many of the "high risk" States. The top tier injury states listed are those without helmet laws.

Click to expand...

Gee. Total surprise. Didn't see that coming.

skibumwi said:

Its: "There are Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics"

Click to expand...

AKA...figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

Statistics aside, I felt least safe riding in Connecticut and Massachusetts. Drivers seemed aggressive and and heedless of any sense of driving etiquette. I’ve ridden in most states of the continental US. I know feelings aren’t facts, but the danger felt real!

Don't feel bad - I don't feel safe driving in Mass. in a car! (And I grew up there. but left 40 years ago...)

179212 said:

Safest state when I pay attention to my surroundings keep an eye on other drivers ride safely, most dangerous state when I don’t

Click to expand...

Winner!