Motorcycle.com

allbikesbiker · 07-04-2004, 06:33 AM

Ok.

(comment on the article, not the poster.)

so tell us what we don't already know.

It makes all sportbikers look bad.

It's never going to change.

Darwinism will weed them out but they're are more waiting in the wings to take their place.

JALacroix · 07-04-2004, 06:41 AM

I think any rebuttal that I would make would simply state that I am a responsible motorcyclist, always wear full gear, and don't treat our nations highways as my personal race track despite the fact that I ride an open-class sportbike. All of my riding friends do as well.

Thus I would urge the writer to not overgeneralize. Unfortunately, it only takes a few of these 'nitwits' to have a large negative impact on public perception.

Pud · 07-04-2004, 06:49 AM

While it's true the riders would be far smarter wearing proper protective gear the question should be why the author gives a s*#t. If I'm blasting by you, on the freeway, going twice your speed, how does that affect you? As long as you don't have to alter course, or change speed, how are you inconvenienced? If some fool wants to ride without protective gear it's not my skin.

christian_gates · 07-04-2004, 07:08 AM

I didn't take that article as particularly "anti-biker" but "anti-youth-biker culture" - which is characterized by semi-fast riding, passengers and no protective gear. Her point is that you should watch out so you don't hit these folks.

All that being said, her points are somewhat inconsistent. I've driven through Chicago, and I don't remember any 70MPH speed limits; there's a whole lot of 35, and some 55 on the freeways - but not 70. So this women cruising by in her SUV at 70 is likely exceeding the speed limit by a minimum of 15 MPH and perhaps by much more - in a 6,000 pound mass that can cause real damage not to the drive but to everyone else. In other words, she has the potential to cause a lot more "inconvenience" for a lot more people than some jerk in sunglasses with a loud pipe.

Beyond that, modern sportbikes stop from 60 in about 120 feet (some less); SUV's are 150 - 170, a Honda Civic is 150 - 170, and Euro sports sedans are 110 - 120. I imagine that there are some high-end sports cars that are in the 100 - 110. So the argument that bike take longer to stop than cars is specious.

Basically, what you have here is a member of the safety-crat brigade who sees something dangerous and dislikes it purely because of its danger; if that biker was going 65 on a Goldwing, she'd still find a way to hate it.

My response to people like that is to declare that I think that airbags and ABS are worse traffic menaces than even the jumbo SUV, and because I'm inherently in mortal danger at all times on my bike, I'm definitionally incentivized to behave in ways that won't kill me.

So many issues are evident in that rant that it's impossible to address all of them in a brief (or not so brief!) forum note. Rant is a good description, though.

cdg

sarnali · 07-04-2004, 07:48 AM

I'd say the "stinger in her rear bumper" and refrences to butterfly tattoos and halters on the passenger show her clear penil-obsessive lesbonic tendencies.

Other than that she probably spilled her latte` on the sumptious cream colored leather of her new Toureg when some squids "suddenly appeared beside her" and can't get the stain out. So she's directing her angst and pent up frustration at her own inability to rise to her percieved level of competance in her chosen field, held back by the glass ceiling and good-ol'-boy network who view her not as the aggressive young women on the move she percieves herself to be, but a snotty little witch who can't even make a decent pot of coffee, and transfering it to some young people who don't have enough sense to conform to her orderly little view world. Probably has a cat too.

That's my guess

BMW4VWW · 07-04-2004, 07:48 AM

Somebody should inform the joker that wrote this diatribe that the sport bikes he is complianing about will stop more quickly that he can in his family truckster. As for nitwits on motorcycles in the Chicago area, perhaps we can dissuade Kpaul from riding there in the future. VWW

tomhorn · 07-04-2004, 08:51 AM

Nyucknyucknyucknyuck! You forgot to mention that she couldn't hear NPR over the exhaust wail.

TuneREX · 07-04-2004, 09:01 AM

Dammit, you made me spill my latte on my keyboard...

TuneREX · 07-04-2004, 09:03 AM

"Incentivized"!!?? Stop it, you guys are killing me.

tomhorn · 07-04-2004, 09:03 AM

Read between the lines here. Her biggest complaint isn't the rider's lack of protection (she couldn't give a rat's ass), it's the fact that she has to PAY MORE ATTENTION WHILE SHE'S DRIVING. Don't want to have to miss a sales call while tracking down somebody to get the blood stains off her ML430 I guess. Essentially, we're making it harder for her to go through life with her head up her ass, a warm, comfortable feeling some people resent being deprived of.

07-04-2004, 06:33 AM	#1
allbikesbiker Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 179	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant Ok. (comment on the article, not the poster.) so tell us what we don't already know. It makes all sportbikers look bad. It's never going to change. Darwinism will weed them out but they're are more waiting in the wings to take their place.

07-04-2004, 06:41 AM	#2
JALacroix Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 31	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant I think any rebuttal that I would make would simply state that I am a responsible motorcyclist, always wear full gear, and don't treat our nations highways as my personal race track despite the fact that I ride an open-class sportbike. All of my riding friends do as well. Thus I would urge the writer to not overgeneralize. Unfortunately, it only takes a few of these 'nitwits' to have a large negative impact on public perception.

07-04-2004, 06:49 AM	#3
Pud Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 6	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant While it's true the riders would be far smarter wearing proper protective gear the question should be why the author gives a s*#t. If I'm blasting by you, on the freeway, going twice your speed, how does that affect you? As long as you don't have to alter course, or change speed, how are you inconvenienced? If some fool wants to ride without protective gear it's not my skin.

07-04-2004, 07:08 AM	#4
christian_gates Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 209	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant I didn't take that article as particularly "anti-biker" but "anti-youth-biker culture" - which is characterized by semi-fast riding, passengers and no protective gear. Her point is that you should watch out so you don't hit these folks. All that being said, her points are somewhat inconsistent. I've driven through Chicago, and I don't remember any 70MPH speed limits; there's a whole lot of 35, and some 55 on the freeways - but not 70. So this women cruising by in her SUV at 70 is likely exceeding the speed limit by a minimum of 15 MPH and perhaps by much more - in a 6,000 pound mass that can cause real damage not to the drive but to everyone else. In other words, she has the potential to cause a lot more "inconvenience" for a lot more people than some jerk in sunglasses with a loud pipe. Beyond that, modern sportbikes stop from 60 in about 120 feet (some less); SUV's are 150 - 170, a Honda Civic is 150 - 170, and Euro sports sedans are 110 - 120. I imagine that there are some high-end sports cars that are in the 100 - 110. So the argument that bike take longer to stop than cars is specious. Basically, what you have here is a member of the safety-crat brigade who sees something dangerous and dislikes it purely because of its danger; if that biker was going 65 on a Goldwing, she'd still find a way to hate it. My response to people like that is to declare that I think that airbags and ABS are worse traffic menaces than even the jumbo SUV, and because I'm inherently in mortal danger at all times on my bike, I'm definitionally incentivized to behave in ways that won't kill me. So many issues are evident in that rant that it's impossible to address all of them in a brief (or not so brief!) forum note. Rant is a good description, though. cdg

07-04-2004, 07:48 AM	#5
sarnali Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,416	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant I'd say the "stinger in her rear bumper" and refrences to butterfly tattoos and halters on the passenger show her clear penil-obsessive lesbonic tendencies. Other than that she probably spilled her latte` on the sumptious cream colored leather of her new Toureg when some squids "suddenly appeared beside her" and can't get the stain out. So she's directing her angst and pent up frustration at her own inability to rise to her percieved level of competance in her chosen field, held back by the glass ceiling and good-ol'-boy network who view her not as the aggressive young women on the move she percieves herself to be, but a snotty little witch who can't even make a decent pot of coffee, and transfering it to some young people who don't have enough sense to conform to her orderly little view world. Probably has a cat too. That's my guess

Sponsored Links	Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum Advertisement

07-04-2004, 07:48 AM	#6
BMW4VWW Founding Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 1,833	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant Somebody should inform the joker that wrote this diatribe that the sport bikes he is complianing about will stop more quickly that he can in his family truckster. As for nitwits on motorcycles in the Chicago area, perhaps we can dissuade Kpaul from riding there in the future. VWW

07-04-2004, 08:51 AM	#7
tomhorn Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 72	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant Nyucknyucknyucknyuck! You forgot to mention that she couldn't hear NPR over the exhaust wail.

07-04-2004, 09:01 AM	#8
TuneREX Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 47	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant Dammit, you made me spill my latte on my keyboard...

07-04-2004, 09:03 AM	#9
TuneREX Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 47	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant "Incentivized"!!?? Stop it, you guys are killing me.

07-04-2004, 09:03 AM	#10
tomhorn Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 72	Re: Anti-Motorcycle Rant Read between the lines here. Her biggest complaint isn't the rider's lack of protection (she couldn't give a rat's ass), it's the fact that she has to PAY MORE ATTENTION WHILE SHE'S DRIVING. Don't want to have to miss a sales call while tracking down somebody to get the blood stains off her ML430 I guess. Essentially, we're making it harder for her to go through life with her head up her ass, a warm, comfortable feeling some people resent being deprived of.