Legal Minimum Gear Standard

Originally Posted by jonboy

Absolutely. Freedom is little more than a figment of the imagination. We are simply free within the constraints we've been given. And as for rights, well... we like to kid ourselves I think. In a hundred years time there will no rights or freedoms as we currently see them, life will be very ordered and the machine will be in place. Thank Christ we're alive now, stop bitchin' and get on your bikes and ride!
.

... In full kit! (or not, as you see fit)

Correct, call it choice, democracy, freedom, natural selection, whatever.
Oh!! Just a moment, that can still happen whatever you wear. You are not immune.

Unless and until the unlikely event that motorcycling gear that can guarantee non injury to the wearer in all circumstances can be made available at an affordable price to all, this argument is utterly irrelevant, you can still get hurt whatever you wear, so the bizarre idea that if you wear CE approved at all times you'll never have any public money spent upon you, is clearly wrong.

Why oh why do you keep making assumptions about what I am saying? I have never said that this is about preventing injury. It is about reducing risk and the potential for unnecessary cost.

Everything is a risk - I merely suggested that there was a cheap and easy way to have potential improvements and cut what we can all see are unnecessary risks, i.e. not restrict people from wearing what they want and also not placing an undue strain on an already overburdened system.

There is a difference in treating the cost of a broken leg compared to the cost of treating a broken leg with skin and muscle grafts and even more physiotherapy afterwards, etc.

Still can't see past the balance sheet can you? Is this all this question means to you?

It simply isn't a: wear this don't ever get hurt/don't wear this guaranteed to be hurt argument. This whole question is just playing with the details and worst of all by even entertaining the suggestion of legally forcing minimum levels of gear the whole thing plays neatly into the hands who would like to restrict our freedom to ride full stop.

Be careful what you wish for you, might just get it.

Again, a small joke at your expense and you are off making suppositions about the point I am trying to make.

It seems that your point isn't about freedom or even cost but that you don't want to give the powers that be any incentive to try to potentially improve rider safety.

Don't you believe that they can be educated or is it just an anti government thing?

When it come down to it none of us like being given advice whether it is good or bad, and we hate being told what to do its human nature. Some of us learn by our mistakes some dont.

What ever we can do to show motorcycle riders as responsable people to the none biking public and ban it brigade, the wearing of minimum adiquate protective clothing would be a good step.

Here we go again! I'm with Ping on this one. What next, everyone must wear factor 30 sun tan cream at the beach in case those poor Doctors have to deal with the inevitable, ugly, melonomas? Were all big boys and girls here, and we can make our own choices. As for Johns compulsory advanced training / re-sits. Who's going to pay for them? Assuming there is an insurance break for those who do the extra stuff, they'll just charge the other folk more. The same folk who might not be able to afford the extra training will get hit with the higher premiums. And that's assuming premiums come down at all, let's not forget car/bike crime has a major influence here. I'm all for advanced training, but it has to be voluntary, or even better...free. Motorclycling is an inherenlty dangerous mode of transport, the best gear in the world won't help if you have a head on smash with a BP tanker. If we're that concerned about our health and safety we should ban biking all together, problem solved!

Originally Posted by kevbuck

What ever we can do to show motorcycle riders as responsable people to the none biking public and ban it brigade, the wearing of minimum adiquate protective clothing would be a good step.

yes yes yes!!!!! Finally someone seems to have got it!
look here every time there is a bike accident where someone is killed, (please note I'm not talking injury here) due to there own negligence, it reflects badly on bikers and biking as a whole.
Somebody was talking about statistics well think about how they might change if the law did! Alot of people make stupid mistakes, like not putting on enough gear and don't expect to lose their life because of it. Call me crazy but if I was so uneducated and cocky as to believe I didn't need gear I'd like the government to protect me atleast until I learnt the preciousness of the life I'd been given.
whether u use gear or not this issue will effect u because as much as a helmet saves ur head, what about ur arms, legs, hands and feet and body, without those we're all pretty useless,
take care,
C@ xx

Anyone remember the free two day MAC course given away with all new Honda bikes back in '99 & '00 (I think).

Run by ex-police instructors the days were run at whatever pace you needed. The instructors view was that they knew people would speed so they wanted to make sure they were as safe as possible at those speeds.

What an absolutely aweson idea. It was a real shame that they didn't stick with it - I'd have been interested in seeing the accident statistics from those years broken down by manufacturer!

I fail to belive for a minute that the 'burden' on the NHS by bikers is in the slightest bit significant.

I also fail to belive that motorists who get cut up/overtaken/generaly anoyed by bikers think "ooh, they've got leathers on, thats ok then". So declairing to a very disinterested cage driving comunity that we're taking responsible steps to save ourselves would achieve squat.

Bikers policing themselves by trying to get others to get proper protection would be much better because it would actualy make a difference, rather than a few standing up and saying to the government"Were to f"£king stupid to think for our selves, please control us!". Requesting more legislation would make us look foolish, and would encorage the governments burgeoning desire to control every last bit of our lives.

I'm with Sid on this one.

I agree with whoever said that m/c RTAs are probably insignificant costs to the NHS...anyone got any figures, happy to be proven wrong.

Anyhow, I pay my national insurance contributions so if I want to cash in, then up to me, I think. And if your concerned about helping out with the costs of any possible NHS treatment then I'd make a similar point about rather not forking out on taxes to help educate other peoples little brats

Originally Posted by Dr Rich

I'm with Sid on this one.

I agree with whoever said that m/c RTAs are probably insignificant costs to the NHS...anyone got any figures, happy to be proven wrong.

Anyhow, I pay my national insurance contributions so if I want to cash in, then up to me, I think. And if your concerned about helping out with the costs of any possible NHS treatment then I'd make a similar point about rather not forking out on taxes to help educate other peoples little brats

'sup Rich? Got no-one to direct you to the right side of the bed at the mo?

At the risk of adding more fuel to this already heated debate.

Whilst I didn't start this thread, the main point of my e-mail to MCN (see Page 1) was concerning the existence of already unnecessary legislation (loud cans and dark visors) when we know them to actually improve safety. No meaningful analysis has been carried out to show the benefits of both these 'banned' items.

This, I endeavour to point out, flies totally in the face of the fact that individuals are allowed the freedom to dress as they wish whilst riding a motorbike or scooter. If the government's PRIMARY concern was our safety - shouldn't they at least increase rider awareness and make 'dress sense' a compulsory part of CBT.

My argument is that, if legislation cannot be 'proven' to be effective by easily measurable results, then common-sense issues (such as appropriate clothing) simply fall by the wayside.

I believe it is our duty as responsible individuals to lead by example. However, the government also have a duty of care to properly educate road users, for their own safety.

The Highway Code states:
Consider wearing ear protection. Strong boots, gloves and suitable clothing may help to protect you if you fall off.

... hardly a strong message.

I ,like others, would not wish to see any further restrictive legislation introduced - there's too damn much already.

If 'Think Bike' (or whoever) really want to help educate riders, they should launch a campaign each summer to highlight the likely effects of falling off (even at low speeds) with no protection. It happened to me in my youth and it f*ckin' hurts!