This photo was taken on a left-side exit ramp from a busy Interstate. Traffic on the highway itself was between moderate and heavy and was rolling right along at 65 MPH.
Note the almost complete lack of protective gear. While not visible from this angle, he was wearing goggles. Further down the ramp, just out of sight, traffic came to an almost complete stop in the right lane, as there is an off-ramp for a major shopping area about 3/4th of a mile ahead on the right; a steady stream of vehicles was exiting the Interstate and coming onto this road where the traffic was very slow.Ol' Dainbramage on the Harley hit the throttle and got into the left-hand lane, just ahead of a SUV which was moving very quickly. He didn't dump his bike, evidently, as I heard nothing.
Two minutes later, I was passed by another rider. That rider was wearing a helmet, boots and armored leathers.
I can appreciate that nobody wants to put on full leathers to go riding on a warm summer day. However, at least for riding a motorcycle in heavy traffic, not doing so would seem, well, stupid to a degree that makes, in comparison, Mark-Sanford-cheating-on-his-wife appear to be positively rational.
From what little reading I've done, the classic car-motocycle accident is where the motorist executes a left-hand turn right into the path of the motorcyclist. For those, protective gear can mean the difference between an ambulance ride to the ER for treatment and a similar ride for organ donations. It has precious little to do with how good a rider one is; not wearing protective gear is betting one's life that every motorist out there will pay attention and see the rider.
To my mind, that's just not a good bet to make.
UPDATE: "The safest thing you can do with [a motorcycle] is give it to your mortal enemy."
6 comments:
This is a moment where "freedom" intersects with socialism.
Tell me I'm wrong.
I'll wait.
A year or so ago, my son-in-law took a header off his custom Harley, on a California freeway, at 70 m.p.h., because of a faulty fender bracket. Thanks to his protective gear (full set of leathers, full-face helmet), he was shaken, but otherwise unhurt.
Russ,
"Socialism?" Oooh, the modern-day boogyman of the Right.
Is there anything that would lead you to conclude that I am advocating anything, other than motorcyclists recognize a bit of asphalt-hard reality.
No! I am not accusing you of anything. I'm just saying that his freedom to ride without a helmet has the ability to cost all of us more for our health insurance were he to not have any.
It just points out that freedom has it's costs.
"At what cost, freedom".
weird, the word verification that came up is halmat. Karma?
Come to Phoenix, and you will see this all the time. I don't know what the fatality rate of bikers are on our roads, but since most don't wear anything more than shorts, t-shirt and deck shoes, I don't think road pizza is an uncommon result.
Russ,
OK. I misread your first comment. In a libertarian world, if the guy riding the bike had no protective gear and if his family couldn't prove the ability to (or pay for) care for him, the rider would be triaged off to the side, shot up with morphine and left to die.
But it is not.
There's another guy in a hospital in Hartford, CT in critical condition. A week ago, he lost control leaving the Interstate and went into a guard rail- no helmet on that guy, either,
I don't wear nomex coveralls or a helmet when I fly. My airplane is old and it is not required to have a shoulder-harness. I had a 4-point harness installed as soon as I first flew it home. The FAA makes it extremely easy, federal paperwork-wise, to install shoulder harnesses in airplanes.
Post a Comment