Dick Head on a Bird today M5

[frenchuk]

It is the law in this country that all drivers and passengers in cars have to wear a seat belt, no choice, the law, however if someone has an accident and is knocked unconscious, and the result of the accident is that the seat belt release is unaccessable and that person dies as a result, are the government to blame for putting them in such a position.

Derek I think it's statistics talking. Seat belts save more lives than not wearing them, so it's compulsory - at least that's the reasoning to make them compulsory. I think it'd be the car manufacturer who'd be liable.

 

[Jaws]

Whilst I personally rate the use of seat belts highly ( having raced stox and bangers you soon learn ! ) the reason they were originally made law was simpley cos some piece of shite money grabbing MP owned a BIG stake in a firm that made seatbelts.. He pushed the law through.. It was only AFTER the event the stats really showed he just happened to have been right.

 

[Duck n Dive]

This has turned into an interesting one......

frechuk M8 you're right - nothing is straightforward and everything is shades of grey.

But as u can see if someone takes a single position and refuses to budge it's often easy to support such a position with logic. There are facts, statistics and anything you want them to say.

Vic Reeves once said 99.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot......

The trick is to select a single objective reason, which to argue against could be interpreted as somehow unreasonable - in this case I've actually been doing the opposite!!

So.... seatbelts will save life so to argue against them is unreasonable and means you wish harm on others??

Crash Helmets, speed limits, smoking, walking on motorways, bungee jumping, skydiving, jet skis, mountain climbing all the same. So anything proposed which is certain to save life or injury cannot be objected to without subjecting yourself to ridcule.......

I once saw a senior British Airways manager use just this tactic to try and intimidate a meeting to get the outcome he wanted with agroup of other compaines. He proposed something that was so onerous/unrealistic to achieve and challenged anyone to disagree with him as he centred the need on "health & safety".......guess who stuck his oar in and had some fun.............

Life is full of greys but I'd suggest the starting point should always be that Free Will takes priority and there must be a damm good reason to restrict it.

 

[frenchuk]

Free will all for it, but like I said freedom is synonymous with being able to make choices and fact is that we can only make choices once we are informed. And freedom also comes with taking responsability for our own actions.

Vic Reeves once said 99.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot......

Is that a fact or an opinion?

 

[Jaws]

Sooo.. lets get this straight.. As someone who has a competition licence, has over the last 40 years visited the tarmac occasionally, I am not qualified to ride dressed as I want because I am uninformed ?

Freedom might well come with responsability.. but then so does just about everything else we do in life.

For instance Pierre, have you ever considered the moral implications of all the voice overs you do ?

Are all the products you have advertised completely safe under all circumstances, have you ever asked if anyone has been injured, become fat, become thin become dead due to a product ?
Have you checked to make sure the company involved does not employ child labour, or tests on animals, or .. orr.... well you see what I mean.

You excersice the freedom to work for who you want...

Yes, what we do does attract responsability .. but if we take that to its natural conclusion we all end up sitting in the dirt naked, afraid to move a muscle !

 

[frenchuk]

Whilst I personally rate the use of seat belts highly ( having raced stox and bangers you soon learn ! ) the reason they were originally made law was simpley cos some piece of shite money grabbing MP owned a BIG stake in a firm that made seatbelts.. He pushed the law through.. It was only AFTER the event the stats really showed he just happened to have been right.

Are you sure it's not urban myth? Are there facts to back that up? the name of the MP, the date, the name of the company? I never heard that one and I'd love to learn about it!!!!

Sooo.. lets get this straight.. As someone who has a competition licence, has over the last 40 years visited the tarmac occasionally, I am not qualified to ride dressed as I want because I am uninformed?

I don't see the relevance with you having a competition licence and your experience on the road with the argument of choice. You might be a superior rider, choice can still only be properly made with the benefit of information. You are qualified to dress any way you want; gaining knowledge simply help you to know what your informed choice entices.
Personally, I find it bizarre that generally people accept that they have to wear protection (lid) that would be likely for them not to be dead, but don't accept that they have to wear other protection that would be likely to for them not to be paralysed, a burden to themselves and their families and in some cases leave their families and kids behind. That is my personal opinion, I don't want to impose it on anyone and that is separate from the argument of choice and responsibility.

Freedom might well come with responsability.. but then so does just about everything else we do in life. For instance Pierre, have you ever considered the moral implications of all the voice overs you do ?Are all the products you have advertised completely safe under all circumstances, have you ever asked if anyone has been injured, become fat, become thin become dead due to a product ?
Have you checked to make sure the company involved does not employ child labour, or tests on animals, or .. orr.... well you see what I mean.
You excersice the freedom to work for who you want...

Of course - and I believe that people aren't stupid and don't go buy blindingly a product just because they hear a hunky gorgeous deap beautiful french voicew;;v advertise it - they have free will to do so, information on any product is available nowadays. Would you buy something just because the girl dvertising it has great knockers and cock-sucking lips? OK, bad example - would you buy something just because the voice advertising it is a hunky gorgeous deap beautiful french voice? :k If I advertise ice cream, am I responsible if people buying are greedy and eat one gallon a day and become lard arses? If I advertise cigarettes, am I responsible for people being so stupid they don't understand it's bad for them beside the sign 'SMOKING KILLS' on it? They have the free will to smoke or not, to eat ice cream the way they want... but they can fuck right off if they want to blame me for the effect it has on them!

Yes, what we do does attract responsability .. but if we take that to its natural conclusion we all end up sitting in the dirt naked, afraid to move a muscle !

Are you saying that we do things because we don't take responsibility for it? I think we can do whatever we want, knowing what it entices and what's involved, and then take responsability for our choices. I guess if you were playing russian roulette, I guess you'd like to know the odds of a bullet being fired - 16.66% if the barrel is swivelled each time, the odds of dying from a slug entering you head - pretty much 100%, and would accept the consequences of the game. Now the two facts I stated - wheelchair if spine on curb, arm paralysed if landing on shoulder - are simply factors that help calculate the odds.

 

[Jaws]

Are you saying that we do things because we don't take responsibility for it?

No mate.. I am saying that people do things without thinking them through to the end..

That does not make tham idiots or dickheads..

holding a comp licence means nowt except that at some time you will have been travelling somewhere at a fair old rate of knotts, and if you have been trying at all you will have had the occasional off.. Equally, travelling in excess of 100,000 miles on public roads means little if you do it in a bus.. but I did that for several years as a motorbike dispatcher..
Perhaps I would have been better off siting that ?

But you are missing the point a little Pierre..
I am actually NOT saying it is right to wear little or nothing in the way of protective clothing.. What I am saying is that a person, even in this day and age of pathetic knee jerk reactionary doo gooders, still has the right to chose his or her own level of protection..

The reason I sited myself was because I know what experience I have...The person originally mentioned in this thread may have equal or more information than anyone of us.. he may, for all any of us know, be a skin graft surgeon !
I am simply saying that it is basically wrong to say someone is not the
brightest stick in the box without knowing all the facts..
And I stand by my original statement..

Whilst I may not agree with someone, I will stand up for their right to have their own thoughts and ideas. ( providng said thought and ideas do not include causing physical harm or hurt to others by their actions )

 

[trophychap]

Jaws

So, let's say, just for instance a couple of years ago, some dickhead from near you goes out on his vroom vroom without proper protective clothing and has an accident. They rush him off to hospital where it is quickly discovered he has life-threatening spinal injuries, so they rush him in to theatre.

Meanwhile someone else has been rushed into hospital by their distraught family, and requires immediate neurosurgery to save their life, but unfortunately can't be operated on at the moment, because the neurosurgery team is already engaged, dealing with the spinal injury.

Can you HONESTLY say now, well it's the riders choice and he doesn't affect anyone else?????

Jen

 

[Cruser]

Pierre, everything we do in life we do after risk assessing. Before we walk down stairs in the morning, we move that slipper off the top step, move the dog out the way etc etc.

We cross the road after checking for traffic etc. Why is it such a giant leap to understand that some people assess the risk of coming off their bikes as very low?

I quite often ride without leathers on in hot conditions and I'm off to work. It feels nice to have the breeze flowing over keeping me cool and arriving at work relaxed, cool without the sweatiness of being in leathers before I've even started.

Who has the right to call me a dickhead if I pass them on my way to work dressed as I am? My reasons for 'taking the risk' are based upon my own risk assessment which includes history of previous rides (i.e. only two 'off's' on the road, doing things that I wouldn't have done had I not been wearing leathers) - so only two off's in thousands of miles and 15 years of road riding - the route to work, the speeds I'm likely to do, the traffic I'm likely to encounter and of course the on-going/continuous risk assessment I make whilst riding.

I'm not stupid and am well aware of what my skin will look like if I come off, it's just that the risk of this actually happening is so remote that it's worth it for me.

 

[Cruser]

Jaws

So, let's say, just for instance a couple of years ago, some dickhead from near you goes out on his vroom vroom without proper protective clothing and has an accident. They rush him off to hospital where it is quickly discovered he has life-threatening spinal injuries, so they rush him in to theatre.

Meanwhile someone else has been rushed into hospital by their distraught family, and requires immediate neurosurgery to save their life, but unfortunately can't be operated on at the moment, because the neurosurgery team is already engaged, dealing with the spinal injury.

Can you HONESTLY say now, well it's the riders choice and he doesn't affect anyone else?????

Jen

Yes, I can honestly say that he doesn't affect anyone else.

Because you can't prove to me that he wouldn't have had those injuries anyway.

When I'm not wearing leathers, my riding changes dramatically - basically far slower. Why do I then ride like a complete twat when I've got my leathers on? I try and get my knee down at every opportunity, ride well over 100 where the opportunity presents itself etc etc. And so does - to a lesser or greater extent - everyone else who rides a bike.

Why on earth do people think they'll be ok just because they're wearing leathers? If you hit that road sign at 70, you're f*cked either way :xm

Let's say I'm unlucky enough to have a mechanical failure; so my brakes fail and I come off. I'm travelling to work and I'm not wearing leathers but I'm only approaching that bend at 45 when I crash. Now let's say I am wearing leathers and I'm now approaching the same bend at 75 when I crash. I hit a post, what will the end result be? F*cked for life, whichever scenario.

Taking precautions for your self preservation reaches far beyond wearing the right gear. All of us who ride Birds, at some time or other, ride them at speeds well beyond the law and we way up the consequences as we go. We don't honestly believe that we'll be OK if the worst happens at those speeds do we :dunno:

 

[Wolfie]

Hands up who is FULLY kitted out.

IE Back protector and not the peice of shit that comes with yer jacket, but a proper one????

last study i saw was 18% of riders have a proper back protector.

whose you have not got one why not??? you must be dickheads!!!

Have yours leather got

shin armour
knee armour
thigh armour
hip armour
double layer arse
elbow armour
shoulder armour
chest protection
back protection
etc etc etc


all CE approved??


who has any form of chest protection???

not me so i must be a dickhead.





































I choose to wear what i wear when i decided to go on the bike.

shit when i first started riding it was in a donkey jacket two pairs of jeans and a pair of doc martins, there was not much else and what there was i could not afford.

 

[gypsy]

Can i hear more about that bird with the big knockers ? :beer:

oh and Woolfie re chest protection read EMMA :blush:

 

[Cruser]

I choose to wear what i wear when i decided to go on the bike.

shit when i first started riding it was in a donkey jacket two pairs of jeans and a pair of doc martins, there was not much else and what there was i could not afford.

And somehow you managed to get through life without serious injury to yourself - quick, go and buy a lottery ticket as you are an extremely lucky person :neenaw:

 

[Wolfie]

russ lend us a quid????

gippo, they were hugh!!!!! but her leather jacket squashed them to pancakes

 

[derek kelly]

Jaws

So, let's say, just for instance a couple of years ago, some dickhead from near you goes out on his vroom vroom without proper protective clothing and has an accident. They rush him off to hospital where it is quickly discovered he has life-threatening spinal injuries, so they rush him in to theatre.

Meanwhile someone else has been rushed into hospital by their distraught family, and requires immediate neurosurgery to save their life, but unfortunately can't be operated on at the moment, because the neurosurgery team is already engaged, dealing with the spinal injury.

Can you HONESTLY say now, well it's the riders choice and he doesn't affect anyone else?????

Jen

Or put another way Mr non smoker is walking down the road minding his own business when mr loopy from loopyfarm decides to dowse him in petrol and set fire to him, passers by alert the fire and ambulance he is rushed off to hospital, where in the next bed is Mr 40 cigs a day, who happened to light a cig just as he was topping up the fuel in his petrol mower when the whole thing went Whoof-bang, who gets the priority treatment? the one with the worst injuries regardless of who he is or what he was doing.

 

[Barrie]

Yep, we live in a free country, well, freeish. If you want to ride the full length of the M6 stark naked, go for it but when you fall off and end up in A&E The staff are living in a free country too and might just not see you as a priority. Yep ride as you see fit and all the sane ones among us will hope to be miles away when you need help, I really don't want to see a fellow rider in that sort of mess. I confess to riding in jeans on occassions but without Jacket and gloves? NEVER.

 

[derek kelly]

Barrie, would these be the same hospital staff that get rat arsed (as we all do) smoke (as some do) over eat (as Lumpy does) even hospital staff do things that are inadvisable and as they are being paid to provide a service they are trained to put their feelings aside and deal with the job in hand regardless.

 

[frenchuk]

But you are missing the point a little Pierre..(...)
Whilst I may not agree with someone, I will stand up for their right to have their own thoughts and ideas. ( providng said thought and ideas do not include causing physical harm or hurt to others by their actions )

Silly me, and me who was thinking that you were the one missing the point!

Seriously, I don't think anyone is missing any point, it's just different perspectives! My point one more time is not to tell people what to do - it's that an informed choice is the only type of choice an intelligent being can make, other point is that with freedom comes responsability.
I 100% agree with you about standing for people's rights to have own thoughts provided those thoughts don't harm other people - provided they take responsabilty for those thoughts.

Russ I can see your point of risk asssessment - I for one doesn't assume I'll fall off :bang: but still want to be prepared if I do. The off I had in December was a freak salt situation, landed on my shoulder and would be paralysed in my right arm if I didn't wear my gear - so even with scortching hot weather I wear my jacket.

It'd be interesting to see how many people would like to go back to the time when helmets were not compulsory. I'd say most of us would still be wearing their lid - and that basically mean that most of us are not ready to die, but accept the risk of getting paralysed - and before anyone says, well stop biking cos there is an inherent risk higher than say with cars, my point is about MINIMISING risks so that you can CONTINUE enjoying yourself - that is MY opinion, don't want to impose it on anyone, and don't expect anyone to impose their opinion or choice on me - you don't wear protection, great, don't ask me to chip in for a skin graft. You don't want nanny to tell you what to do, great, I'm 100% with you, but don't go crying to nanny and ask her to pay for your choice. And Andy, don't worry, you're not a dickhead :k

 

[derek kelly]

you don't wear protection, great, don't ask me to chip in for a skin graft. You don't want nanny to tell you what to do, great, I'm 100% with you, but don't go crying to nanny and ask her to pay for your choice. And Andy, don't worry, you're not a dickhead :k

But Pierre we are paying Nanny with our taxes, so we are only getting back some of what we have put in, there are more people in hospital with smoking related illnesses than there are people with Motorbike related injuries, and I know that you pay tax everytime you buy a packet of cigs, just like I paid a whacking great amount of tax when I bought my Bike, just like I paid a whacking great amount of tax when I bought my helmet and protective clothing, just like I pay a whacking great amount of tax everytime I put petrol in my bike, just like I pay a whacking great amount of tax for the privilege of keeping my bike on my own property.

 

[Wolfie]

bollox i want to be one :bang: :bang: