One subject can guarantee that the generally high standard of debate in the Backroom will degenerate: namely Motorcycles!
Surely few will dispute that motorbikes are exhilarating, have fantastic performance, great manoeuvrability and are relatively economical.
On the debit side few will dispute they are extremely dangerous for the rider - albeit sometimes this is attributable to car drivers - and some are ridden recklessly in traffic.
I wonder therefore why the mildest criticism of bikes or bikers brings forth such a passionate, and often irrational, defence.
Could it be that, for many of us, motorbikes represent our first love affair with the internal combustion engine and nothing must be allowed to besmirch that memory?
Cue Growler - to raise the standard of debate!
|
I think it's the fact that most car drivers who have never ridden a motorcycle don't understand the considerations of a motorcyclist. I was certainly in this category before I started riding a 'bike - and to be fair, why would they understand? I read a thread on here a few weeks back about the considerations of truck drivers and now I understand them better and I'm grateful for that - I think it helps me be more cooperative on the road - but I've never driven a truck, so how would I have known otherwise?
-Mark
|
|
|
(Rises to bait with Pavlovian predictability to kick off informed debate).
I could quote the timeless aphorism embroidered on so many Harley-Davidson T-Shirts.
"If You Have To Ask You Wouldn't Understand".
But that's a bit smug. I won't pretend to speak for the majority of riders, only myself, although I know much of the ff would be echoed by them. BTW I use the word "you" in its generic sense. Also I refer throughout to dedicated trained bikers, not Domino's pizza-pilots.
* Some people climb mountains and fall off them, others break their necks ski-ing or jumping out of planes, some even row around the world in rubber dinghies and still others hammer 4 X 4's across inhospitable deserts, all take pleasure in pitting wit and limbs against something unforgiving and winning, us maniacs do it on bikes. If you don't have something to pit your wits against in life....? I mean doesn't it get a bit boring playing Scrabble every weekend or planting asparagus...? Somebody will probably come up with a stat alleging that more people meet their Maker slipping on the soap in the shower than doing wheelies down the Kings Road....
* Your 40 mile commute is a chore, like doing the washing up. You need CD's and toys in the car to keep you awake and amused. My 40 mile ride is an experience which leaves me with adrenalin to spare and a deep-down glow. I've smelt the countryside, been in touch with it, fried or frozen as the weather dictated, left obstacles long behind while you're still sat there cursing; you may even have felt like dozing off. I daren't, my life may depend on my alertness. To me a ride is a much a mental workout as a session in the gym (not that I've used that free membership I got for X'Mas, where the hell did I put it anyway...?) After 44 years in the saddle (wasn't that a book by Major Bumsore?) I still to this day get flutterby's in my stomach as I suit up pre-ride and check everything as I throw my leg over. Believe it.
* Your car gets a wash and brush-up now and then, it's a utensil. Unless it's an E-Type or a Mustang (!) you worry about it depreciating and the bills when some complex piece of engineering goes wrong. If it's a Renault or an Alfa you may have trouble sleeping and resulting loss of libido. These days you can't even fix much yourself, you have to pay some erk large amounts with not always satisfactory results, as the contributions to these columns bear out time after time. My bike is put on the lift every couple of weeks and lovingly cared for even down to the toothbrush and Q-Tips to polish the crooks and nannies. Almost any fault,and there hardly ever is, I can fix myself and it's a pleasure to do it;
* My bike has made me countless friends. Riders I have never met salute as we pass. Should I, or they, encounter trouble it is in the unspoken code of honour that we stop and help out. I enjoy an active social life with groups comprised of every walk of life from congressmen to taxi-drivers, no barriers no bars, simply because all ride; The appellation "Bro" and the fist to fist handshake levels everyone. I happen to like that;
It is not particular to where I live, either.
* My bike is beautiful. Every part of it has a real purpose. My relationship with it is that of a lover (well almost!). It is finely engineered, supreme in its economy of mechanics, everything serves a purpose; peeling off steamy leathers after a long hot ride and checking her over with a beer in one hand and a rag in the other as the engine makes satisfying ticking noises as it cools ought to be up there with yoga and tai chi. My aromatherapy is hot 20w50 tinged with a whiff of petrol and very hot metal, got the scars to prove it. As for my car after a trip, I lock it and go inside without a backward glance;
* I confess to being primarily a weekend warrior these days. A disciplined ride with my group following proper techniques is a satisfying exposition of teamwork and discipline; where I live bikers are the prime movers in promoting road safety and good riding with government agencies and the private sector;
* Getting the gears and the braking just right, hitting that apex with sparks coming off the footpeg then pouring on the power as the tail wiggles out of the bend is serious "yee-haw" stuff. Oh yes, cars do it too, but it's not so much fun; don't tell me Harleys can't do it, the chicken strips on my tyres are living proof;
* Not many cagers I'll venture get real driving tuition. I mean DRIVING, not just the stuff you weasel through to get your license. We would not accept anyone on a ride who hadn't done at least the Motorcycle Foundation Safety Course. 3 days of that is pretty good stuff;
* OK, weather is everything. But suit up with the right gear and it doesn't need to be that bad, even those cissy BMW's these days have heated grips and Lord luv us for the delicate little flowers there are even heated suits! Where I am I'm still waiting for air-con suits LOL......
* If I want to, not really but some do, I can beat just about anything on 4 wheels away from the lights. Juvenile perhaps, but power is also good to have on hand as a way of getting out of trouble;
* Bikes are sexy. Mondeos are not. Ever seen a good-looking woman in full leathers power a Harley into a parking space, nonchalantly kick out the jiffy stand, kill the engine, take off her helmet, shake her long glossy tresses free, and stride nonchalantly into the bar ignoring all the admiring glances before kissing you on the cheek and asking for a beer? Let me tell you that is a very nice-to-have, even if I did have to buy the bike...
Alright, enough of the whimsical, let's try some practical.
* I'm on my bike. If I wasn't I would be in one more car ahead of you. Probably with only me in it. Class discuss use of road space cars vs. motorcycles. Or one less parking space. Or even, shock horror, less CO2 contributing to the extermination of humanity by 2050 (if Discovery Channel is to be believed). Go figger, as they say;
* To give a personal example. At rush hour out of the city I will need 1 1/2 hours between leaving the Smoke and cracking open the first San Miguel on my verandah. That's if I use my car, it isn't raining, and something hasn't broken down on the tollway. On the bike I need about 35 mins to that first cold one, while you are cursing your way through the melee trying to negotiate the off-ramp;
* Road conditions, surfaces, distancing, maintaining space, tactics, concentration mean a lot more to me on my two wheel than they do to you on your four. My errors and omissions are likely to have immediate and possibly dire consequences. That means I am probably a more competent roaduser by force of necessity, if nothing else.
* There are no more idiots on bikes than there are in cages. Because my 2-wheeler can go faster, negotiate traffic easier, find better parking, use less gas, and I may now and then fall off may well inspire heated discussion among the holier-than-thou's in the saloon bar of the Goat and Compasses, does not entitle you to project your prejudices, social judgements and everything else on the motorcyclist. If you cagers can drop the scales from your eyes you will have to admit there is a lot more worse driving than worse riding.
Finally (well almost) a little logic: good riders (notice I said good) are no more likely to have an accident than any other road user. If they do then of course their vulnerability renders the consequences more severe. But that is a choice we make. It does not make motorcycles per se dangerous. look at mine. There it is parked up and quiet. Is it dangerous? Is it going to leap out and mug you? I wish the woolly thinking and flawed logic ("motorbikes are dangerous, yadda yadda yadda") of the saloon bar pundits were translated into a bit more understanding of what bikers as legitimate road-sharers face.
Time and again I come to the conclusion jealousy (and Doris in the kitchen saying "oo-er, you can have your mid-life crisis, but you ain't having one of them things, dangerous them are. I don't care if Mr Smithers at No. 34 bought one, over my dead body") plays something of a part in the antipathy towards us.
Now then, I have to meet the pastor at the True Light Bible Study Class down the street. He has formally complained (in writing no less) that the sound of my Harley passing his establishment of enlightenment on Sunday afternoons is interrupting his perorations and waking up his congregation.
Doubtless he'll tell me that if I have to ask why that I wouldn't understand.
|
|
One good thing about motorbikes is that they are a vey effective alternative alterantive to a compulsory organ-donation system. OK, not everyone's in favour of organ transplants anyway, and "effective" depends on whether you are the rider ...
|
|
|
I think Growler made most of the points that need to be made.
I for one do not defend bad riding but without going and looking up the statistics most accidents involving bikes are the car drivers fault.
A friend of mine is in Swindon General as we speak, 2 broken wrists and a broken leg that he will likely lose and all because a women yakking on a mobile pulled straight out in front of him without looking.
Motorbikes filtering through traffic seem to make car drivers go crazy even if done in a safe manner. I have had cars deliberately close gaps on me to stop me getting through. Is it simply an 'I'm stuck so you will be too' mentality?
What kicked the latest argument off was someone who deliberately sets out to dazzle oncoming motorcyclists because he doesn't like the fact that they have dipped headlights on all the time, even though this is now a legal requirement for new bikes. Plus he can't understand why the bikers get annoyed, and I suspect if he keeps doing it more direct action will be taken at some point and then he will be whining about violent bikers.
To be honest I can cope with aggressive anti-bike car drivers dazzling me and closing gaps in traffic, what really frightens me is the car driver who seems totally oblivious to his/her surrounding encased as he is in his/her leather/airconditioned/CD'ed/be-phoned little world. In the words of the great Ogri (strangling a car driver), 'but I didn't see you', 'yeah thats because you didn't %%%%%%% LOOK!'
|
NW,
I carry a donor card. My spleen would not be much use as I don't have one, my liver is probably shot but they're welcome to the rest if they like.
In favour of an opt-out scheme rather than an opt-in one but suspect thats another thread...
|
For me, I wish more motorists would realise that bikers are *much* more vulnerable than they are. With NCAP and so forth, people feel safer and safer in their cars, and so take more risks than they might have - less observation, more use of their mobile, more speed.
The biker is still about as vulnerable as he always has been, so is at increased risk from the car drivers.
On the bike, I can usually spot someone on their mobile from three cars back. I can tell you it *does* affect your driving. I don't really mind as long as you're on a straight road - the problem is at junctions (lack of abservation) and if you pull out to overtake (again, lack of observation).
The current obsession with paint all over the road doesn't help either - you don't notice in the car, but because it has a high concentration of glass (to make it reflect), white lines are extremely slippery in the wet, as are manhole covers. We're therefore having to look out for dozy car drivers, as well as for the road. Car drivers deliberately trying to dazzle on dark wet nights are not welcome!
|
|
|
In favour of an opt-out scheme rather than an opt-in one but suspect thats another thread...
A message from at least one ex member of the hospital A & E staff.
Opt in to a full face helmet to save donating face to the road.
It seems to me trendy for HD riders to have open face helmets
Can Growler or anyone else tell me why?
|
I for one would never ride without a full face helmet because I wouldn't feel protected but the open face/closed face arguement is not so clear cut.
When hitting/sliding down the road face first in a full face the head is being forced back and may damage/break the spine. You may be protectng the face at the expense of the spine and it may be possible to reconstruct the face with plastic surgery whereas spinal demage is almost always permanent.
Now on that happy note I'd better go away and do some work.
|
|
|
Good point about full-face helmets. I could say they're darned hot over here, but that's not an answer.
I confess: I hate them. They feel claustrophobic and restrict my vision. I'd rather be able to avoid donating my face to the road than protecting it from it. I think it's a fashion and comfort thing why cruiser riders wear what they do (I wear a beanie round town for instance). Personally I have a Harley flip-face helmet (bottom part hinges up). Makes it easy to have a cold drink at a stop, converse etc without taking it off. With a full face I can't easily read my instrument panel (as you know with HD's this is on the tank.
I would place more emphasis on wearing good leather and boots.
|
"..good leather and boots"
Including gloves. You're more likely to go hands down than face down, IMHO, and you can make a case for not having the solid upper edge of a chinguard pointing in your direction of travel, if you do.
|
|
|
|
|
I carry a donor card. My spleen would not be much use as I don't have one, my liver is probably shot but they're welcome to the rest if they like. In favour of an opt-out scheme rather than an opt-in one but suspect thats another thread...
How about refusing patients donor organs unless they are on the register themselves? Might make people think twice about not opting in
|
"How about refusing patients donor organs unless they are on the register themselves?"
Now there's a thought!
It reminds me of the suggestion, because of the reluctance of MP's to support capital punishment despite the majority views of their constituents, that murder should carry the death penalty unless the victim was a Member of Parliament... :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wonderful stuff, Growler. I shall cut and paste it. Was that straight off the top, or did you have it prepared and just waiting for the right question? :-)
I particularly liked your comparison with yoga and tai chi - if only more people viewed it like that. I also think that (as was very nearly the case in the 50's and 60's) car drivers should cut their teeth on two wheels. I didn't, as it happened, because my parents were a tad protective, but I bought a bike as soon as I was able and it taught me a load that I didn't know about anticipation, external conditions and road surfaces.
|
I will chuck my two euro cents in as a past bike rider.
Firstly, it was cheap transport, but more importantly in my day it was the earliest transport you could get. (bike license at 16) So bike it was.
I have never been so scared or so excited before or since. Nothing come close. you feel the speed with every sense. I am currently fighting the urge to become I born again middle age biker (casualty). I fear (hope) I will loose and return to to wheels.
Re full face or open face. I have been over the top of a car at 40 mph. Face down on the road with a full face helmet. Broken nose was the only facial injury. Would it have been worse with open face? who knows.
|
"I fear (hope) I will lose and return to two wheels."
We hope so too, RF! I had a lot help here choosing a replacement bike a few months ago. It's not necessary to spend a lot of money, either, although a new helmet is probably a good idea...
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=22863&...e
|
|
|
|
Time and again I come to the conclusion jealousy (and Doris in the kitchen saying "oo-er, you can have your mid-life crisis, but you ain't having one of them things, dangerous them are. I don't care if Mr Smithers at No. 34 bought one, over my dead body") plays something of a part in the antipathy towards us.
Growler - have you been bugging my house?
|
Re helmets;
I wear a full face with a flip up front. If these were not made I would go for an open face as I can't stand the feeling of my head being fully being enclosed without being able to open the helmet.
I have heard the opinion that you are more likely to suffer facial injuries with an open face but I am not convinced. The instances where you come off a bike and land face down must be very rare, and I would think in such a case you would suffer a broken neck anyway.
There is also the problem that anyone without whatever tube paramedics carry that allow them to give the kiss of life to wearers of full face helmets will be unable to help should you have stopped breathing after an accident. A paramedic is not going to be the first person on the scene after an accident, and with all the fuss about ambulance response times you may have a long wait.
There is also a legitimate point of view that the more enclosed you are with safety devices the more complacent you will be about taking risks in the first place. (The Volvo Syndrome)
|
As a total non biker, thanks for the info on helmets.
I suspected it was a lot more complex then I first thought.
I used to ride a few thousand miles a year on two wheels so I do know a little about road surface etc. and I have come off in a big way at 40/50 mph. I do wear a helmet when I go out on my bike but I have to admit it does not have a face guard.
Another point.
I have no wish to delay a bikes progress and often do a gentle swerve left to try to indicate that I am aware of them and I am happy to share the road. Most do a little lift off of their left pinkeys as they pass and that is nice. I know this is an informal procedure but it seems to work most of the time. If the bike does not pass then I might have just confused him/her and they think I am not in full control.
|
|
|
|
I'm shocked
"As for my car after a trip, I lock it and go inside without a backward glance"
What, even the Mustang?
As a relative newcomer to biking, I can vouch for the adrenaline factor. The bike is convenient, fast, stimulating and when you get there, you can even park the blessed thing.
I hate my full face helmet for the feeling of claustrophobia it gives but I couldn't afford a flip front job. I usually ride with the visor open to the first click to feel some draught and stop my specs steaming up; a useful reminder of speed being that it slams shut at about 80mph.
Not being a lifetime biker I go on rideouts with the local IAM group to try and improve my skills. There's a collection of riders with ability to spare. I have been known to let my boot delicately kiss the tarmac on rare occasions but I'm nowhere near keeping up with these guys. They've got nerves of steel.
Hawkeye
-----------------------------
Stranger in a strange land
|
Henry,
Good that you make way. Don't be put off if it seems you don't get an acknowledgement, in some circumstances its just not possible to raise your hands off the bars or nod your head and lose your eye focus. London traffic being an obvious example where too many things are happening at once.
Hawkeye, when it comes to helmets there is no such phrase as 'can't afford', this item encases your brain. Best full faces are IMHO Arai and a revelation for those who haven't tried them, £400 in the shops but frequently £180 brand new on Ebay or go to the BMF rally (usually May in Peterborough) where last seasons gear is sold at very low prices.
|
|
|
|
|
>>>>>>I wonder therefore why the mildest criticism of bikes or bikers brings forth such a passionate, and often irrational, defence.
To return to the thrust of Cardew's post and to cite my own experience. I work with a number of m/c clubs and federations along with the police to represent the biker community as a positive force in promoting road safety (no other motoring organisation here does more), a contributor to good causes, and a lively and positive influence in the general motoring community. We have gradually whittled away nonsense like bikes being banned from pay carparks, banned from the motorways, and bizarrely, road tunnels.
Again and again it is simple ignorance that informs our critics' value judgements.
(Recently a senior government official in charge of traffic planning here announced that "only poor and uneducated people ride motorcycles, and they are dangerous because they can't accelerate fast enough to keep up with traffic". Priceless or what? And this in a city with some of the world's worst traffic congestion, where one might have thought 2-wheelers could play a valid role).
Or, and perhaps more understandably, that clown doing lane-splits and wheelies 100 mph down the M25 - yes I've seen 'em too, and my contempt is utter -- becomes the stereotype by which the vast law-abiding sensible majority is judged.
I know that in most countries and UK is no exception, the biker community does a lot to enhance its visibility and reputation by positive means.
It's not surprising then that our responsible biker gets a bit incensed when some peabrain without a clue has a go at him.
As for Cardew's other point: "besmirching" (LOL) our folk memories of the infernal combustion engine. Well, in my case maybe. Biking life was one of Saturday afternoons surrounded by clutch plates, oil drips, rounded off nuts, trodden-on tubes of red Hermatite and then trying to get the grime out from under the nails in time to pick up a copiously hair-lacquered peroxided Sandra in impossible skirt and heels who would none the less uncomplainingly mount the pillion, then get to the Essoldo in time for the Saturday night movie.
I had to woo the objects of my desire early in life via my motorcycle, not many could afford a car. Bikes were an essential part of the repertoire.
"Ere Tina, where's yer boyfriend?" "Oo? Oh you mean 'im. Dumped 'im, 'e only had an Ariel 500. New one's called Nick an 'e bought a Beezer GOLDIE last week on the never-never. Gorgeous 'e is 'n all".
So, yes, besmirch those rose-tinged memories at your peril, you cosseted cagers. Stocking tops in the pre-tights era astride a Bonneville pillion are not easily forgotten :+)
What will you have to reminisce about in 2040?
|
What will you have to reminisce about in 2040?
1973, three girls in a white ford capri with black vynil roof, deciding which one to drop off.................
|
Fissies, nagging the old man into co-signing the HP for the X7 cause you are only 17, passing the test, nagging the old man in to co-signing the HP for the Big 9. Tanking the Big 9 and having to take the bus and a second job to pay down the HP...
Ah me...
|
|
|
|
My whole attitude to bikes and bikers is based around my fear of what happens if the biker falls off or, worse, is knocked off.
So I don't get on one. My juvenile experiences on the back of a bike always resulted in a close encounter with the road, a goalpost (!) or the local police. They all hurt too much.
As a confirmed car driver, I try and make life easier and safer for bikers. If they look like they want to overtake, I try and get my road position to what's helpful to them. If I'm following a bike, I leave a very long gap.
Occasionally I see a biker behaving like a total idiot (just like the odd car driver) in which case all of the above applies, only more so. If the biker gets into an argument with a car, they are going to lose - it's that simple. I don't want that on my conscience even if it's not my fault.
And every so often, I sit in a traffic jam, watching a bike weave through the traffic, and think "why don't I get one of those?".
|
Well what about this nauseating piece of condescending ordure drawn up by some pimply arts graduate warming his seat and waiting for his pension, who wouldn't recognise a motorcycle if he fell over one?
I would love to get him over here with my companions for some re-education up a dark alley with a tyre iron. Well of course there wouldn't be any point in cutting them off would there? There weren't any there in the first place.
Gawd, I'm glad I live her and not there.
www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/pages.nsf/Li...F
Sorry Cardew, informed debate this isn't.
|
I find the bottom line is when I get out of the car, I think, another day at work.
As I get off the bike, it's a case of, 'Stop grinning, and enjoy the day ahead.'
'Nuff said
|
|
|
Gawd, I'm glad I live her and not there. www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/pages.nsf/Li...F
Wha...?
I had to pinch myself. That isn't a joke. That scares me.
|
"We hope 'Bummers' will amuse you and at the same time help you remember what can go wrong.
Enjoy your riding – but keep 'Bummers' in mind."
Indeed.
--
Adam
|
|
|
|
Well what about this nauseating piece of condescending ordure drawn up by some pimply arts graduate warming his seat and waiting for his pension, who wouldn't recognise a motorcycle if he fell over one? I would love to get him over here with my companions for some re-education up a dark alley with a tyre iron. Well of course there wouldn't be any point in cutting them off would there? There weren't any there in the first place. Gawd, I'm glad I live her and not there. www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/pages.nsf/Li...F Sorry Cardew, informed debate this isn't.
Growler,
I am not silly enough to cross swords(keyboards) with you as I would inevitably lose. However you are illustrating exactly the point I was making about over-reaction in defence of your beloved bikes.
This is simply a campaign to get some motorcyclists to ride more safely. Its style obviously has irritated you; but then it is not aimed at bikers like you. However it might - just might - make an impression on a biker or two. I hope I don't sound patronising when I say there are some bikers that like to read comics.
As for cutting them off - could it have been the work of a female?
C
|
It is an insult to anyone's intelligence to address them in this way, let alone bikers. The style is atrocious, let alone the pusillanimity of the seat-warmers who dreamed it up.
Every week my local bike forum is full of good solid riding advice, properly presented, respected for its content, and, if necessary debated maturely. I can assure you we are some of own biggest critics.
We could have offered them a dozen useful informative and engaging ways of getting these messages across in ways which would stick and assure retention.
If you have a Council like this Warwickshire lot, which appears to be peopled by staff with a mental age of 10 producing their latest art class assignment imagining this is the way to communicate with their target audience, it is hardly surprising it will engender strong reactions. This is the worrying bit, never mind motorcycles, that gov't of a so-called first world country cheerfully thinks this is the way to talk to its customers, which raises serious questions as to which planet they inhabit. How are they addressing the rest of their duties, playing ring-a-ring-a-roses and having hugging sessions?
Again it just reinforces the stereotypes by which the uninformed make their judgements.
|
Growler,
Presumably the campaign is directed at "that clown doing lane-splits and wheelies 100 mph down the M25 - yes I've seen 'em too, and my contempt is utter" rather than the responsible member of a motorcycle club who reads biking safety publications.
Advertising campaigns are often more effective when addressed at the more intellectually challenged or irresponsible in society. In the AIDS awareness programme I would think that it was irrelevant to tell the vast majority in UK not to share needles and wear a condom when indulging in certain practices.
I can't think of many road safety initiatives from 'Green Cross code', 'Clunk Click every trip' that were necessary for the responsible citizen. There wasn't howls of protest that motorists were sterotyped as drunks by the 'Don't Drink and Drive' campaign.
So however puerile this latest effort might be, it is hardly a Federal case; but, to get back to my original point, it is about bikers and a vigorous defence must be mounted!
C
|
I think I'm with Growler on this one.
The campaign makes the usual mistake. It is probably aimed at the clown brigade, as Cardew suggests, but:
- it is still noticed by the rest, and manages to insult them
- it is aimed at the clowns but is clearly not going to have an effect on them as it is too childish
|
|
C'mon guys. If you're insulted by that then your skin is too thin. I found it amusing, but whether it is effective is another matter. The clowns always think they know best and are perfect riders. Young males tend to feel invulnerable and so drive/ride accordingly. If anyone needs parts of their anatomy removed it is these guys (be great if they could be removed for just a few years and then replaced).
|
As my brother keeps pointing out to me when I get irritated by such things, unfortunately these messages have to be presented so as to be understood by (as he puts it) 'The lowest common denominator' of the population on the basis that the more intelligent of us (at least I think I can include myself in that) will understand the message no matter how simple wheras a more complex message may be missed by 'The lowest common denominator'.
I suppose the alternative is 2 messages, the second of which would almost certainly be unnecessary as if you've got half a brain you've already worked out the content of the message for yourself; and you'd still be irritated by the simple message!
Do the people who issue the 'stupid' message care if you're irritated?
|
Look at it this way. These clowns are paid out of taxpayers money. It is a worthwhile expense as it keeps them away from important jobs where their lack of competence would have a detrimental effect on the economy.
If producing messages which are aimed at those who are too stupid to earn enough money to buy a motorcycle or pass a test on one keeps them amused, well it is probably cheaper than locking them up in some sort of institution.
|
|
One dimensional views (as depicted in thw warwickshire cartoons) tend to stick with people. Woman at work this week reckoned that she was not possibly to blame for an accident 'because she was going slower than the speed limit' - that's what the current focus on speed alone is going!
|
So let us assume it is a good idea to try and stop people killing themselves on motorcycles by excessive speeding; and lots do - look at the statistics for motorbike accidents with no other vehicle involved. Who do we aim it at?
Well for a start it ain't the 60+ Harley riding individual. It isn't even the 'born again' biker; it is predominantly those under 30 and particularly teenagers.
Now I, nor I suspect most people in the Backroom, are experts in how to get messages across to the target group. However we are very willing to criticise those who are paid to do so. Could that be that we look at it purely from our perspective and find it difficult to understand how the target group thinks?
However for all that does a campaign that you feel misguided insult motorcyclists? Or are we being just a teeny bit sensitive?
|
|
|
|
