De-restriction process

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

I feel fairly safe in saying that most of the young riders on here don't seem any more invincible or reckless than the older ones, and would be respectful of the massive 67bhp.

Ahem *cough cough*

100bhp

Obviously 100 for me is just about enough to pull my weight

Originally Posted by plowsie

WHAT?

What I mean is, you say that the problem with the current method is that someone can do their restricted licence, not ride for 2 years then buy a gixxer and kill themselves, well, your gonna get the same problem if you had to take your restricted licence, clock up enough miles (X) and do ANOTHER "test" to prove they have ridden those miles. That person could still chose not to ride at all for 10 years after that test and go out and buy a gixxer, bit like an extreme born-again.

[yorkie_chris]

But you get the same thing now, don't see why that would be any more pronounced with a second test/assesment

Exactly, thats my point! Having the extra test will change nothing (IMHO)

Originally Posted by poisonidea

What I mean is, you say that the problem with the current method is that someone can do their restricted licence, not ride for 2 years then buy a gixxer and kill themselves, well, your gonna get the same problem if you had to take your restricted licence, clock up enough miles (X) and do ANOTHER "test" to prove they have ridden those miles. That person could still chose not to ride at all for 10 years after that test and go out and buy a gixxer, bit like an extreme born-again.

Thats the failing with any system; i could give up riding next year, then not have a bike, then in 15 years time I'll think "i was a good rider once...i'll go and buy myself that old GSXR750 K6 my dad used to have, that'll be a nice way to bring myself back into biking..."

Really, there is no way to ensure people choose a bike that they can handle, and no way of monitoring peoples attitudes to riding. But with courses like bikesafe, and having the common sense things really drilled into people during their training, hopefully people will be mature bikers and take things carefully and build themselves up to understand a bike. On another forum, there is a guy who hanst been riding long, yet he has already totaled two GSXR600's. He rides like a prat (from what I gather from his forum posts) and regularly enjoys thrashing down public roads like its the last lap of a MotoGP. Can't help him, but we can help ourselves.

Anyway, an informa assesment after a year of passing your test would be a good thing - you can be invited to do it, and an incentive could be lower insurance, or big discounts on biking accesories or something

Matt

Woah, thats the most anyones ever written in response to a comment I've made, I feel so loved, thanks Matt Usually whenever I post anything it totally kills the thread I understand what your saying, I just dont think it will make much (if any) difference other than incurring yet more costs to the rider. Like I said, your always gonna get nobheads whatever testing system is used.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by alpinestarhero

having the common sense things really drilled into people during their training,

Can't teach common sense, and the problem is people like your gixxer man tend to actually be quite intelligent, so its no problem to get through a test then go back to riding however you like.

There was a statisical thing a while ago that said the "average" person to die on a bike was 35, 2 kids, self employed and on a sports 600. (I think this was derbyshire police said this?)

I think the whole restriction thing sucks tbh.

It hasn't been proven to have saved lives or reduced accidents, all it's done is put people off buying bikes, or pushed those who can into doing Direct Access instead.

If young bikers have to be restricted, isn't it about time the govt did something about bringing in laws to do the same for young car drivers?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by timwilky

Sorry but I am of an age where you did your test on a 250 and rode what you liked. That worked very well. You ride like a knob you die. end of problem. I cannot see what was wrong with this method.

Originally Posted by Lozzo

I think the whole restriction thing sucks tbh.
It hasn't been proven to have saved lives or reduced accidents, all it's done is put people off buying bikes, or pushed those who can into doing Direct Access instead

+1 (But I'm not that old )


+1 As well as another big expense if you're unlucky enough to be under 21

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Can't teach common sense, and the problem is people like your gixxer man tend to actually be quite intelligent, so its no problem to get through a test then go back to riding however you like.

There was a statisical thing a while ago that said the "average" person to die on a bike was 35, 2 kids, self employed and on a sports 600. (I think this was derbyshire police said this?)

Good thing my dad didnt have a 600 until he was 45, 4 kids, employed by someone else

Matt