BGL

I'm sorry did i say she'd ever been in an accident? Oh that's right i didn't.

Yeah she gave it some scratches here & there and typical shit for a male or female of that age

..Wait and i swear i didn't mention what type of car she would've gotton as an alternative if she had a choice. Might as well do that now, it'd likely been a VW jetta.


While i mostly agree.. and it still doesn't apply to what i'd said..

How about I don't think riders who can't physically handle, maneuver or stop their motorcycle by comparison to others should be allowed to ride. How's that sound?

Wait so you don't own your own method of transportation?

What age did you get your license? You were instantly a good driver? Really?

Chances are good your driving is generally poor, given reaction time, and the movement inherently tied to it is not something i'd guess is a skill of yours.

But hey how about a good old fashion pissing contest, we'll throw down some cones in a parking lot & you can pick your death, cage or bike.

Assuming you have your license, when you got yours ... you were a good driver?

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a bit scared driving around an eco box especially if its your first car. Don't make this out to something it isn't (which we can count on)


Yes and i don't feel sorry for you either. Because quite frankly i'll bet money your riding & driving skills are inferior. But you chose all this anyways..

Why thank you Mr Instructor. On that note, how about putting more then a piss ass amount of miles on your bike before running around claiming to know &/or having an opinion.

Isn't cheap? Well let's take a look at the value of your shit.

slugsgomoo

Honestly about the bright colors thing, I've noticed zero increases in close calls with a dark grey busa & black gear as i had on my red sv with a red jacket or my green KZ400 and yellow & black coat.

Honestly, people don't see motorcyclists, not because they're hard to see, because honestly with modern headlights & such they're really not... it comes down to the fact that people aren't paying fucking attention, and they aren't even bothering to look. Hell, I get people who nearly cream me in my bright red 4runner all the time.

Personally, I think it ought to be a bit stiffer than if the person is in a car, simply because the driver of the car has a responsibility to wield a much more dangerous weapon. "failure to yield" is bullshit when someone's dead. I'd go to vehicular manslaughter at least

besides, you can't spell manslaughter without laughter.

Jalharad

They should recieve the same treatment that I would have if I had hit them and killed them.

Clackamas

Epic Fail.

FastCat

That's my point exactly. You lecture as if you think I just got my first bike yesterday. I have suffered exactly three collisions with cars over the course of my 25-year riding career. Two collisions were the result of the driver of the car not paying enough attention to be able to see a motorcycle stopped at an intersection (one was a stop-sign and one was a red-light). One driver was drunk, and the other driver was talking to his cel-phone (the phone ruined his windshield when it flew out of his hands after he hit me).

The third collision was caused by a person with a revoked license who either didn't see me or didn't care (he never stopped so nobody ever got the chance to ask him).

If you cannot be bothered to pay enough attention to notice a motorcycle before you flatten it, then you have no business operating a motor-vehicle of any kind. If you're so inept as to "not see" a 500lb motorcycle then how many pedestrians and bicyclsts must you mow down before there are some sort of consequences.

If you operate a vehicle anyway after your license is revoked, then you should be put in an environment where it is impossible for you to have access to motor-vehicles.

If you have trouble seeing motorcyclists, your eyesight is too poor to safely operate a motor-vehicle and for your own good (and the larger, public good) you should NOT have a license to drive.

Because, let me tell you, I know from first-hand experience that when you get hit by a car on a bike, it WILL tend to change your life.

-=edited to add=-
The current law-enforcement climate is such that for people who operate cars who have an intense-dislike of motorcyclists can pretty much mow them down anytime they choose and suffer minimal consequences. This should change (but I doubt that it ever will).

Clay

The way you ask that question makes me think you know a cager who wiped someone out and didn't get caught so now you are having a moral dilemma.

The practical answer is "Yes, if the motorist was at fault, that person should face the law."

Improper

I'm just curious as to how you knew they had a revoked license if he never stopped and nobody ever got the chance to ask him...... Speculation??
Just curious

I for the most part agree with the rest of what you had to say and I was once a hit and run victim of what I presume was a drunk lady in downtown kirkland around 1:30 am on a Weds nite. I understand the frustration....and the pain.

Improper

...and the law should be equally fitting regardless as to if you were drunk, not paying attention also know as "I didn't see", weather, misjudgement ....regardless if you're in a car, suv, motorcyle, bicycle, or an effin bulldozer.

i.e. Drunk in a car and you mow down a ped or drunk riding a motorcycle and mow down a ped = manslaughter = "x" amount of yrs in jail fkr!
not paying attn in a suv or not paying attn on a bicycle and kill someone = manslaughter = "x" amount of yrs in jail fkr!
misjudged the speed of a motorcycle while pulling out (in a car, suv or even in an effin tank) = (yep you guessed it) manslaughter = "x" amount of yrs in jail fkr!

circumstance is someone's dead and some assclown killed them when it probably could have been avoided. Just needed to vent...

nancejd

I'm thinking that if you kill someone while operating a vehicle, you should face charges. It shouldn't matter if it's a biker, a pedestrian, or another cager.

Tigress

I disagree. I think that it does matter why you ended up killing them. Kiling them cause you got yourself drunk and much more likely to kill some one and decided it was still fine to go driving is worse to me than an honest mistake.

One if you used sense you could have easily avoided (I once agreed with some one that one could argue DUI is more murder than manslaughter. You decided to go drinking and decided to drive home like that. The arguement against was that if you are drunk you do not have judgement to which the retort is, then make sure you have a plan to get home before you get drunk).

One you could have just been having an off day. To me there are different degrees.

Tigress

You said you didn't trust her driving and were scared for her being in a small car that you thought would be worse for her if she got in an accident. From what you wrote, it seemed you yourself was claiming she didn't drive well.

I quote you:
"I was scared fucking shitless for her. I think she was scared too. She wasn't the 'best' driver. "

which usually is a polite way of saying she doesn't drive well. So maybe if you weren't inferring she was a bad driver, you should word things better.

And if she was an ok driver, why were you both scared shitless she was in a Geo? It seems you both felt there was a good chance of an accident if you were that scared that she was in a small car.


While i mostly agree.. and it still doesn't apply to what i'd said..

They certainly shouldn't if they aren't willing to try to improve and their response is to just add a safer vehicle rather than improve their skills. Or if they just can't seem to improve their skills. Of course, we're also wondering in comparison to what others? Average riders, professional riders (like on the race track)? If the first, yes, if they can't compare to average riders and either don't want to try to improve to that point or cannot, yes, they should give it up.

What has that got to do with it? My point was if she wasn't a safe driver, she shouldn't be driving, there is mass transit. driving /= right.

i got the impression from your post, whether you meant it or not, taht you had no faith in her driving. Not that she was just learning at that point.

And where do you get this logic? Cause I argued with you? So, since I don't completely agree with you, should I infer that you don't cook well? Cause honestly, not really sure where you are deciding this besides the fact that I pissed you off (it seem as non sequitor as me deciding you cannot cook).

Honestly, probably better than some of these teen drivers out there. Probably worse than others. Yes, I had my share of dumb mistakes as a teen (all parking issues). But nothing that would have made me scared shitless to drive a Geo. My parents weren't even scared shitless that I drive a small vehicle (shoot, they were fine with me driving my little Porsche all throughout college and loaned me a little Geo like car one time when it was broken).

I find those who do not trust their driving are way worse than your normal driver. That's one of my warning signs to watch out for a driver... if they seem scared to drive.. they probably shouldn't be driving (or at least practicing on slow, non busy streets at slow speeds and building up til they are more confident). Anyways... once again, maybe you should look at wording cause when you say she was scared shitless to be driving that Geo, it tends to say to me that she knew she was a horrible driver (and not just your average teen driver either).

Really... you would have been better off insulting my intelligence cause honestly, that at least one could claim you could infer from my response (whether true or not at least it's not pulling crap out of mid air like this... once again it would be like me telling you you obviously haven't cooked much when you've said nothing that would really tell me one way or the other if you have).

I'm not sure how you can tell how many miles I've had when I haven't stated anything about that (and last time I did on this forum was probably a year or two ago).

How does that refute the point that bike ownership here isn't that much cheaper (if not more expensive) than car ownership. Therefore riding here is a luxury, not a necessity. and most likely some one who rode (very high percentage) in this country chose to do so cause they wanted to, not cause they had no other choice (besides mass transit)?

BGL

I don't trust anyones driving if they've just gotton their license. Regardless of age. I've known people who didn't get theirs until in their 20+'s.

Side note: People that intentionally wait until their 20's+ to get their license... don't make good drivers, nor riders (yeah i'm sure there's 1 exception)

No one who's 'just gotton' their license is a 'good driver'. Nor are they 'confident'. I wasn't. Nor were you or anyone else.

Stop acting as if you were.

You never answered your age @ getting your license.

No, maybe you should read what i actually said.

Once again making shit out to something it isn't.

Yes she wasn't the 'best' driver, nor was i when i got my license, nor was anyone, can we complete this pointless circle now?

As far as the rest of the shit i don't believe i (or anyone) has any misconception at all regarding your time on the seat of a bike. You aren't fooling anyone. You can take your arm chair opinion and put it where the sun don't shine. As an apparent rider & moderator of this forum, your opinions often reflect badly & is obviously of some one who has little experience.

This forum has been choking down your lack of experience based opinions for several years now. & I've about had it. At least half of what comes out of your mouth is in contrast with any real experienced rider.

I'm not saying i'm any type of standard to be judged by, but there's no question where you stand.

For me or anyone to make assumptions about your riding & driving ability, is only going to be based on what you've posted over the years. Which is plenty to go by. Ms 'drove a porsche through college'

There is plenty of people that rode (& drove small cars) yesterday today & will tomorrow for gas reasons (ie they can't afford it) & i stand behind my original post.

I will not 'stand by' and watch people cheapen the impact of taking some one else's life based on what the victim 'chose' to ride or drive.

(sorry bout the amount of edits)

FastCat

I know because I got a good look at the license-plate as he was hauling-ass. The LEO's that responded to the scene told me that they have "...had their eyes on this guy" for a long time because of suspicious pawn-shop activity and that they would rather not "interfere with the ongoing investigation". ...somewhere in that conversation the LEO told me that the driver had lost his license due to multiple DUI convictions.

...oh yeah - and the time of the collision was between 9:30 and 10am.

Mithras

Unintentional Homicide...or basically manslaughter for cases in which the driver of the car is clearly at fault. Obviously this is a common sense sort of situation however gathering all the details to prove such situations would be difficult in most cases.

If the driver is not clearly at fault charges should follow standard practice of traffic citation or no fault. Honestly the surviving driver of the car is going to be suffering mentally if their vehicle was a method of impact or cause of motorcyclist death, by their fault or by no fault of their own.

However....in cases in which motorcycle drivers cause the accident the motorcyclist should be held accountable for their actions as well...if they survive of course.

Like the MSF videos suggest....beware of white cars...

dc_sniper9130

criminal negligence and vehicular homicide (if no cyclist fatality, then vehicular assault). if alcohol or drugs is found to be a factor in the driver of the car, the above plus permanent license revocation.

this is of course assuming that the car was really at fault, not the biker riding recklessly and some bullshit technicality makes the car at fault. people won't start paying attention to us on the road until we throw a few oblivious douchbags in the klink for an extended period.

edit: you might make the argument that intentionally elevating the risk level is part of riding. yes, that may be so, but i pay my taxes, i pay for tabs, and i pay to have my license (and endorsement) renewed. i have every god damn right to drive or ride whatever i want, and just because some idiot isn't paying enough attention to his/her surroundings doesn't mean i should have to lose life or limb because i 'felt like riding' that particular day. if everyone concentrated on the road and not eating or carrying on a conversation with someone not in the car, we wouldn't have to have threads like this because the only riders being hurt would be the ones pushing the envelope outside the city limits.

ducatiduane

All motorcyclist should be arrested for murder, because Gregoire is our Governor and she thinks so!



I just think its messed up we can get a bigger ticket for stretching our legs (the guy who 'did a wheelie') than someone gets for KILLING someone.

Now, especially in Ellensburg, we have a problems with bicyclists. They ride out into the middle of the roads all around campus without looking. Pedestrians tend not to look either. So you know what...I PAY EXTRA ATTENTION. I have avoided many accidents, granted I dont live on the west side with all the traffic...but still. I will admit, there are instances where you can't avoid it. But for the most part, if you pay attention and anticipate people...you'll make it home.

However, some teeny bopper thats glued to her cell phone should pay when she turns left in front of a biker. If you hurt someone, you should pay for what you did. Jail time, suspended license, ect. But, the punishment needs to be stiff (but not cruel).


Its a sad day when someone can get more jail time for drug possession than rape/murder. But alas, that is our justice system...

Westbound

I agree whole heartedly. Has anyone seen the German requirements for getting a license? Crazy. Think you have to take something like 14 theory classes and at least 12 or so driving lessons. There almost seems to be a collective idea in America that driving is a right not a priveledge. We don't want to infringe on everyones "civil liberties/rights"...

Personally, I believe that if we had more stringent driver licensing it would drastically cut down on the number of accident that occur. I don't know how many people I've heard say that motorcycling has actually made them a better cage driver as they're more aware of their surrounds, etc. Auto-crossing or any other drivers events can also helped out with driving and car control skill.

Back on topic - There are a bunch of "shades of grey" when it comes to accidents and who's at fault, etc. I believe that the motorcyclist should be treated the same as any other motor vehicle. I think motorcyclists as a collective whole as get the short end of the stick since we're so much more vulnerable/exposed.

My $.02
Aloha,
Ian

kitkat

Wa state has a law problem when it comes to prosecuting people who mow down a motorcyclist in connection with committing a traffic infraction--such as running a red light or otherwise violating another's right-of-way, provided it is not intentional or criminally negligent.

This is because the manslaughter laws that are on the books, ManI and ManII require either intent (ManI) or a misdemeanor or felony crime to have been committed which contributed to the death (ManII). Neither applies to a death where the only other crime committed was an unintentional traffic infraction (an infraction is classed as "non-criminal"). The vehicular assault and homicide laws also require either a criminal-class contributory crime or willful intent.

The problem: What WA state does not have on the books (but needs to have IMO to remedy this) is what is broadly called a "Misdemeanor Manslaughter" law. This is a type of law that enables prosecution & punishment for manslaughter on the basis of a death caused by non-criminal, unintentional negligence, such as a traffic law violation. It is a form of involuntary manslaughter. Other states have such laws and they have successfully (through appeals, surviving even cruel & unusual punishment defenses) prosecuted drivers who accidentally but with non-criminal negligence killed others--and sent them to prison for several years to think on it.

Currently there is no criminal penalty in WA state for accidentally killing anyone with a motor vehicle IF the motor vehicle was otherwise operated in a non-criminal manner (an exception can be "excessive speeding" which can qualify a driver for a reckless driving charge--a criminal charge-- and so then open the way to a vehicular homicide/manslaughter charge). The only way criminal penalties can be imposed is if there was criminal negligence involved--reckless driving and of course anything involving "under the influence" also qualifies. (Reckless driving is a criminal violation BUT requires establishment of *intent* and so is almost impossible apply to all those "I didn't see the (now dead, so sorry) motorcyclist" situations.) BTW, Negligent driving is an infraction (non-criminal, NegII) offense as long as no "under the influence" is involved (Then it is NegI and a misdemeanor criminal charge).

So in order for there to be any real penalty for inattentive *sober* cagers mowing down bikers it will have to come through the legislature enacting an appropriate law. In Wa state at least it isn't an issue of the courts not wanting to punish someone for accidentally but carelessly killing one of us (i would hope), but the fact is they really have nothing appropriate on the books they *can* charge them with in most cases.

So here's a job for ABATE or the other organizations that indulge in state politics: get a misdemeanor manslaughter law on the books. A bonus is that it is not only us that would be interested in getting such a law but the bicyclists would support the effort too i bet.

But no matter if there are such laws or not, it is worth remembering that a motorcyclist, if while breaking the law themselves, gets killed by anyone doing about anything, not much is likely to happen to the cager. But those bikers who are riding in a law abiding manner and are taken out by some clueless moron in a steel box may get some justice--or at least their families and friends will....