Are motorcycles inherently dangerous?

[James Burleigh]

As a person whose job includes implementing enterprise risk management ("ERM") projects at the Berkeley campus, I think about risk a lot. My musings about risk are fueled not only by a professional curiosity, but also by a natural curiosity, a symptom of which is a bachelors in philosophy from the same place I now work.

When civilians (non-riding friends and colleagues) learn that I ride, they often exclaim in some form or other how dangerous motorcycles are. To this I sometimes respond, depending on how weary I am in that moment about hearing another story about how their friend's brother was killed in a motorcycle accident (does everyone have a story like that? :glare: )--I sometimes respond that they are not inherently dangerous, but they are risky.

And I may even go so far, depending now on my interlocutor's appetite for hearing me go on and on about something they don't really care about but just wanted me to be sure I knew I was crazy--I may even go so far as to explain that the risk can be mitigated to a very acceptable level if the rider is willing to get training, make good decisions, never ride impaired, and wear appropriate gear. Of course to this I get back, "Well, my friend's brother was wearing a helmet." Sigh....

Anyway, this morning I was reading an article in which the person being interviewed mentions something called the Bluejacket's Manual given to people when they join the Navy. He said it has "two little quotes, like epigrams," one of which is "The sea is not inherently dangerous, but it is extremely unforgiving."

Whether such a manual exists (never heard of it myself, in spite or because of being the son of a Naval Academy graduate), and whether or not these quotes are in said book, I don't care. But I sure like that quote, which I shall now adopt as my standard reply when told by civilians that motorcycles are dangerous:

[SIZE=12pt][/SIZE]



Motorcycles are not inherently dangerous, but they are extremely unforgiving.

Photo courtesy of "Tom McQuiggan's Home Page" (https://www.mcqart.com/xj600/index.htm)

 

[MEM]

LOVE it ! and I always enjoy your well considered and eloquent posts

 

[Pepperell]

I suppose the same could be said for gravity...or any number of other things.

 

[puppychow]

I like that! They are unforgiving and extremely vulnerable to mistakes, whether made by the rider or made by another.

 

[madmike2]

Yes, there is a "Bluejacket's Manual".

I like Sam's addendum, especially if edited to:

They are unforgiving and extremely vulnerable to mistakes.

 

[Silent]

Good line k:

 

[FJRless]

Given the predictable nature of most motorcycles I'd say they're quite forgiving. What's not always forgiving are the extraneous factors which are sometimes not just unforgiving but also dangerous. Then again, most of us ride for our emotional health not our physical health.

 

[happyPuppy]

One of my backgrounds is in Decision Analysis ( I went to UCB far too long also) One way to analysis it would be the probability of injury in an accident of any type on a Motorcycle vs a car. Even the smallest car has more potential energy than of that a bike, the likelihood of injury is of course much greater. Many riders I believe incorrectly assume that ATGATT will prevent an injury. It will only prevent an injury of the abrasion type. The other types are much more problematic to look at as the most important factor is the increased the time interval the energy is transmitted across. In the case of a head injury and the rebound effect that is important ( Helmets are indeed good), as well as energy dispersion over a wider area. It must be kept in mind that the energy that is transmitted has to go somewhere and better the gear is at spreading the energy over a wider area the better off you are.

We can lessen damage but bikes I agree are more unforgiving in a mishap. One factor never looked at due to the difficulty in gathering information is in cases a bike was able to avoid an accident by lane splitting , a quick swerve etc.

 

[James Burleigh]

One factor never looked at due to the difficulty in gathering information is in cases a bike was able to avoid an accident by lane splitting , a quick swerve etc.

I no longer accept at face value in reading about an accident that 'another car came out of nowhere and slaughter an innocent motorcyclist.' Too often I fear the motorcyclist was a principle cause of the accident. And in fact statistics bear this out--viz., that motorcyclists are a principle contributing factor in their own deaths. This includes, as you say, ability to execute evasive action.

For example, we recently had an accident here on the very same road I wrote about in a recent edition of California Commuter Chronicles. It was a young man (a "kid") on a sport bike who must have gunned it off the previous intersection after the light changed and, carrying too much speed and not having had the proper experience and training, could not respond to a car turning left across his path into a shopping center (I ride past the dried, wilting flowers at the spot every day). What did he do? Brake? Swerve? No. He tried to bail off the machine. Never mind that he should have anticipated such issues in an urban environment and never carried so much speed.

And how can we blame a driver for behaving responsibly but not realizing or anticipating that the bike is actually going 1.3 or 1.5 or 2 times the average speed of traffic, particularly if all the driver can see is a single headlight approaching.

 

[S76]

Can be applied to several things.

 

[JR'SFJR]

For what it's worth, a FL accident attorney sent me a big post card stating: 70% of motorcycle-vehicle collisions occur at intersections, motorcycle fatalities represent about 5% of all highway fatalities each year, yet motorcycles represent just 2% of all registered vehicles in the U.S., and in 80% of motorcycle crashes, a rider is injured or killed while only 20% of passenger car crashes involve death. Motorcyclists are 37 times more likely to die in a traffic crash than occupants of a passenger vehicle.

 

[dcarver]

Can be applied to several things.

JB, yet another thoughtful post. :****: I hate reading your posts, they make my head hurt 'cause then I have to think :rofl:

S76 - you nailed it. From my 53 years, this was the original quote, applied to a variety of scenarios.

Oh, and most all private airplane accidents are due to the fact that

--the pilot failed his primary mission, that is to fly the damn airplane.

When I had my deer strike, I yelled at myself

'Ride the bike, Ride the bike'...

.and it worked.

 

[dcarver]

Faded rear tire, mismatched front and rear, if I see this correctly.. Is this guy 'flirting with disaster'?

 

[Fred W]

...and he's shifting his torso weight up as high as he can to get the maximum peg grindage?

From Merriam Webster Online:

Main Entry: dan·ger·ous
Pronunciation: \ˈdān-jə-rəs; ˈdān-jərs, -zhrəs\
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century
 
1 : exposing to or involving danger <a dangerous job>
2 : able or likely to inflict injury or harm <a dangerous man>
 
Dangerous applies to something that
may
cause harm or loss
unless dealt with carefully
<soldiers on a dangerous mission>. Hazardous implies great and continuous risk of harm or failure <claims that smoking is hazardous to your health>

I'd say that motorcycling fits definition #1 once your realize the meaning of "dangerous" but wouldn't be considered hazardous.

 

[S76]

...and he's shifting his torso weight up as high as he can to get the maximum peg grindage?

That body position has "Ex dirt bike rider" written all over it. I still do it myself. Not saying it's right, but old habits die hard. The other thing I did by habit was to put my inside foot down when I started to slide out on sand in a corner. Almost broke my ankle doing that on the road, at speed. I think I'm cured of that one now.

 

[James Burleigh]

When I had my deer strike, I yelled at myself, "Carver, you are a ******' *****! I can't believe what a ******' ***** you are! This would NEVER have happened to JB, because he is an FJR GOD! What would he do in this situation? He would apply his amazing motorcycling skills and just freakin' amaze the deer out of his way! Man, what a GOD he is!"
...and it worked.

Fixed it for ya, Carver. :****:

From Merriam Webster Online:



Main Entry: dan·ger·ous
Pronunciation: \ˈdān-jə-rəs; ˈdān-jərs, -zhrəs\
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century
 
1 : exposing to or involving danger <a dangerous job>
2 : able or likely to inflict injury or harm <a dangerous man>
 
Dangerous applies to something that
may
cause harm or loss
unless dealt with carefully
<soldiers on a dangerous mission>. Hazardous implies great and continuous risk of harm or failure <claims that smoking is hazardous to your health>

I'd say that motorcycling fits definition #1 once your realize the meaning of "dangerous" but wouldn't be considered hazardous.

Except you forgot that the OED is not the QED. Jeesh!

 

[FJRBluesman]

Here are few thoughts...

1) Motorcycles don't kill people, people kill people.

2) Motorcycles don't cause harm, the concrete/asphalt, or hard objects cause harm.

3) Motorcycles are very forgiving, the objects a motorcyclist hits or objects that hit motorcyclists, are unforgiving.

4) chain saws are so dangerous due to the speed of the chain and sharpness, they should either remove the motor or dull the blade.

5) Knives are way unforgiving, they were made for one thing and one thing only, to cut stuff... well.... Ouch!

I could go on, but I'm really tired, and you have just spent a couple minutes that you'll never get back. I'm sorry.

 

[fjrchooser]

I always figured life was inherently dangerous, everything else was just gravy.

 

[ShinyPartsUp]

Life is a terminal illness.

What do you want to do on your bucket list before you succumb to the illness called life?

Some tolerate more risk than others, in order to perform their personal bucket list.

As JB says, manage the risk as best you can....

before you succumb to life's end stage.

JB, once again a thoughtful thread; I usually read, but do not respond to them. Not because your risk-related topics are poorly written or thought out, but because they remind me of my own cynicism born of experience. For those that find my philosophy above morbid, no offense was implied or meant. That cynicism is based on my years of dealing with the public, my educational background (liberal arts degree, 12 years of philosophy and theology, nursing degrees and the sciences), and my personal and professional experiences. It is born of a growing cynicism as years progress, with little observed positive change in society, or decrease in the capacity of humans to do truly dumb ****.

When I ride a motorcycle, I am aware of the risk. Some days I manage that risk by not riding at all due to mental or physical infirmities. Other days I find myself distracted or fighting the machine, and slow down and use self talk (remind myself to pick clean lines, watch the road ahead farther, brake sooner, etc.) to manage the risk.

But on the motorcycle, my cynicism peels away and the ripe fruit of life beneath tastes good in my parched mouth.