Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > AMA Racing

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-02-2002, 09:21 AM   #21
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Re: AMA Exposes Insurance Institute Errors

You guys still don't get it. The AMA has no creditabiltiy on safety issues when opposes helmet laws. Period end of story. I am an AMA member I pay my dues so YES I CAN BE CRITICAL OF A FAILED STRATEGY. Yes I have written them I have presented facts in the form of David Houghs book quoting a German study. So go back and read my stuff dork. Instead of your patronizing crap like.

"More to the point do you really think that you as a motorcyclist should be spouting off that our only governmental support has lost all credibility because they refuse to support such mandatory helmet laws? " What the hell does that mean. The AMA is not a governmental support. It is an organization period there is no government support. Geez. I can criticize it all day long if I want to.



Also I am not condemning the AMA. Where it the hell did you get that idea. I am criticizing it. That is very different.



"Don't go out on public Internet chat boards and lambaste them as a bunch of organ donor buffoons with no credibility. How can we change the publics’ perception of the AMA and motorcycling? Start with yourself" I never said that the AMA was a bunch of organ donor buffons "



PAL you need to look at what I said and what you said and apologize.

KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 08-02-2002, 09:22 AM   #22
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Re: This clearly points out the need for an independent study.

Where did you get those stats. Please reveal your sources? Anyone can make up crap.
KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2002, 09:27 AM   #23
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Some facts and data for yzf1070

In David Houghs book Proficient Motorcyling, he mentions on page 28 a German Study on head injuries. The study by Dietmar Otte and Gunter Fleton was published in the The Proceedings of the 1991 International Motorcyle Conference. If you use a half helment (skull cap) i.e. no ear and face coverage, You only protect yourself from 38.6 % of the impacts to the head. Not very good odds I say.

KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2002, 09:31 AM   #24
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Re: AMA Exposes Insurance Institute Errors

Read these and apologize



http://news.motorcycle.com/comments....thold=-1#36204



http://news.motorcycle.com/article.m...der=0&sid=1583
KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2002, 05:39 PM   #25
DataDan
Founding Member
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 117
Default Re: This clearly points out the need for an independent study.

All my data came from NHTSA. Fatality data by state and registrations by state are available in their annual motorcycle fact sheets. Go here and use the pull-down to find them. Be careful, because registration data is delayed by one year. I.e., the 2000 fact sheet reports 2000 fatalities but 1999 registration data.


For the Florida pre- and post-repeal analysis I used the query facility to get the breakdown by month. If you ever need to settle a bet about how many unhelmeted drunks die between midnight and 3:00AM, this is the tool for the job.
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2002, 06:24 PM   #26
DataDan
Founding Member
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 117
Default Re: This clearly points out the need for an independent study.

OK, I used the query facility to look at 2000 South Dakota fatals by month and rider state of residence (zip code, actually). In August, 7 riders were killed, 6 from out of state. In the other 11 months, 7 riders were also killed, but only 2 were from out of state.


I'm not sufficiently interested in the question to look at '95-'99 data. The conclusion is obvious: Sturgis draws a lot of riders, and more riders means more deaths. Duh.
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2002, 08:55 AM   #27
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Re: This clearly points out the need for an independent study.

Thanks sorry. Good stuff.
KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2002, 08:55 AM   #28
yellowduc_1
Founding Member
 
yellowduc_1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 138
Default Re: This clearly points out the need for an independent study.

As reguards #'s of death in florida it would be interesting to see totals for automobiles,homicides,boating,and say..industrial causes during the same periods. If nothing else it would probably show just how easy a target they think we are.
yellowduc_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2002, 02:26 PM   #29
sherm
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 22
Default Re: AMA Exposes Insurance Institute Errors



Here is an excerpt from the AMA web site. It is part of the list of requirements for participants in any AMA competition:

"All participants must wear a protective helmet, eye protection, gloves, a long-sleeve shirt, protective pants and boots that are at least eight inches high."



Notice the helmet is not optional - no "freedom" here.

And its not just a speed issue. You even have to wear a helmet for observed trials competitions where the average speed is probably less than 5 mph.



It seems to me that the AMA, with its huge racing programs, should know more about protecting the rider in a crash than any other outfit in the US. Guess what - they have a mandatory helmet law.

sherm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2002, 02:39 PM   #30
KPaulCook
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,752
Default Re: AMA Exposes Insurance Institute Errors

Excellent Post sherm. It kind of says it all.
KPaulCook is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off