Leathers by law - yes or no? - tack
Car manufacturers have provided us motorists with a plethora of safety features to mitigate against our own (and others) errors/stupidity/misadventure. Think of it; air bags, pre tensioning belts, crumple zones etc to try to cut the risk of injury should the unfortunate occur.

On the A12 today, doing 60. I was overtaken by man on a powerful motorcycle. My guesstimate is that he was doing about 80 (maybe). He was wearing shorts, a T shirt and his helmet, of course.

Straight question, should motor cyclist be required by law to wear leathers to mitigate against their own (and others) errors/stupidity/misadventure? I appreciate leathers will not protect against impact, but the thought of flesh dragged on rough road surfaces makes me feel quite faint.

PS-I have nothing against motor cyclists, especially sensible ones.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Pica
I am learning to ride at the moment and there is no way I would go out without protection. I am told the road surface makes a great cheese grater for skin. If you watch some of the motorsport guys sliding along the track you can see the damage it does to their leathers when they get up and I would prefer the leather getting it as opposed to my skin.

I saw a guy today riding a big BMW bike with plimsols on!

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Manatee
Makes absolute sense if you accept the seat belt law. I would put riding without protective clothing much higher up the risk scale than not wearing a seat belt.

Now that you've mentioned it, I can't believe the nannies have overlooked it for so long.

Edited by Manatee on 19/09/2009 at 23:08

Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
Makes absolute sense if you accept the seat belt law.


That's a big IF :)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - CGNorwich
Even with protective clothing riding a motorcycle is many times more dangerous than being in a car without seatbelts so perhaps logically motorcyles should be banned. But then being in a car is more dangerous than being in a train so perhaps cars should be banned too. Come to think of it there have been some nasty rail accidents though so perhaps we should take a look at them as well. Best all stay at home
Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
Come to think of it there have been some nasty rail accidents though
so perhaps we should take a look at them as well. Best all stay at home


But at home you could electrocute yourself with a toaster, cut yourself with a kitchen knife, skip in the shower, scald yourself in the bath, gas yourself with the oven, lacerate yourself on a glass door, or fall down the stairs/out of the window.

Best not to be born. In fact, given how risky things get after being born, it's a wonder the law hasn't banned birth.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - John R @ Work {P}
Dear CGNorwich,

"Best all stay at home"

Good plan... but don't most accidents and injuries happen at home?.
DOH! You just can't win :¬(

John R
Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
Straight question, should motor cyclist be required by law to wear leathers


Absolutely not.

If someone wants to increase their chances of being an organ donor, that's their business. Sure, we all have an interest in people not injuring others, but lack of protective clothing does absolutely nowt to increase his risk of injury to others. It's even possible that the increased sense of vulnerability may make him ride more carefully, thereby reducing his risk of injury to others.

So the man may be an eejit, but that's his business, and I'll happily defend his right to be an eejit in that way.

And before anyone starts on about the NHS costs of patching him up, do remember that it's very very expensive to maintain older people. Pensions, mobility aids, endless visits to the doctor for sackloads of prescriptions, free bus passes and TV licenses -- it all adds up. I don't begrudge pensioners collecting what they've paid for ... but if someone decides to check out early, they leave a bigger share for others. The law should sod off and let people make that sort of perverse choice if they want to.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Manatee
NW, do you take the same view on seat belts (excepting children perhaps, and rear seat passengers who could injure those in front)?

I'm inclined to your way of thinking as it happens, though I'd wear a belt without compulsion.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Altea Ego
Clearly, its absolutely common sense to wear leathers and boots on a motorcycle.

Make it a legal requirement?

No

I have ridden a bike in shirt sleeves and its a wonderful experience (the larger bugs hurt at speed tho)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
NW do you take the same view on seat belts (excepting children perhaps and rear
seat passengers who could injure those in front)?


Absolutely. A front seat occupant's failure to wear a seat belt doesn't imperil anyone else, so the law should have no business imposing it. I'd actually go further, and encourage the courts to ban dodgy drivers from wearing seatbelts. There's plenty of research to show that reducing driver's perceived safety makes them drive more cautiously.
I'm inclined to your way of thinking as it happens though I'd wear a belt
without compulsion.


Me too -- I used to insist as a kid on wearing a belt long before they were compulsory.

I'm also a bit unsure about all this business of belting up children. I'm not persuaded that it's really necessary, and it too has the bad effect of encouraging drivers towards the perception of a higher safety margin, which increases the dangers for everyone. That's a hard one to call.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Westpig
the point about the perceived improvement in driving by someone who is not belted in to a car or riding a m/c with no protective clothing...(presumably along the same lines as the experiment in I think Holland where built up areas successfully had cars and people sharing the same spaces)..

..does not cater for the truly stupid....who will be stupid whatever they're wearing or whether or not they comply with seat belt legislation

.. and does not cater for passengers, particularly children, who are innocent recipients of other people's stupidity

another angle is if someone wishes to ride a m/c wearing shorts that's their choice, but why should my taxes pay up on demand when it all comes to grief and they're stuck for longer in a hospital, for the sake of being sensible. Same principle as the helmet wearing.

I realise there has to be a line drawn somewhere on what is and isn't acceptable. Dare I say common sense should come into it and if you don't have any, you have to comply with the law.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - gmac
another angle is if someone wishes to ride a m/c wearing shorts that's their choice
but why should my taxes pay up on demand when it all comes to grief
and they're stuck for longer in a hospital for the sake of being sensible. Same
principle as the helmet wearing.

I find it quite sad that people really want a PAYG UK whether it be medical or whatever else. Do motorcyclists not have insurance, maybe private health care ?

If it's 30 odd degrees outside and I am only going a short distance I will not put full kit on but will adjust my riding accordingly. If I'm going on a high speed run or covering some distance then it's full kit however uncomfortable it may be in the heat.

Whatever next ? Convertible drivers to wear full face helmets ?
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Fullchat
The financial impact of a 'Serious' RTC is estimated at about £100.000. Forgetting 'organ donning' there are to the NHS and rehabilitation costs, burdens on the welfare state, costs to employers and extra burdens on colleagues through sickness.
Not forgetting that old chestnut - road closures and the hidden costs/inconvenience behind them. A rider scatting along on their arrras and getting up as opposed to sustaining potential life threatening injuries.
These costs are highlighted to justify traffic calming. speed limits , seatbelts, helmets etc etc.
To some extent I can go along with the overall philosophy.
So the introduction of compulsory protective gear would be worth considering BUT how could it be policed????
Most would agree that to ride without protective clothing is madness but as it is not compulsory then some will take that risk.
Having said all that. Of all the motorcycle RTCs I've dealt with; other than one this summer and it was just gravel rash, I cannot recall one where clothing would have made the difference between life or death. Hitting something hard, be it roadside furniture or a car pulling out will normally result in serious consequences unless the rider is lucky to execute the perfect roll over the top. Badly fitting helmets yes but not clothing.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Fullchat
I have Policed pre and post seat belt legislation. The impact of seat belt wearing for front seat occupants was immediate and a resounding success in the prevention of chest and facial injuries in relatively minor shunts. Nuff said?
Leathers by law - yes or no? - lotusexige
I happened to be visiting England a few weeks after the seat belt wearing legislation became effective and as it happend I was staying with someone whose girlfriend was a doctor. She was amazed by the overnight reduction in injuries that had happened.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - CGNorwich
So the introduction of compulsory protective gear would be worth considering BUT how could it be policed????

Cameras of course
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Fullchat
Of course!! Forgot about those :-) And the clothing could be micro chipped wit BS approval codes which could be read with roadside scanners and hand held equipment. Brill!
Leathers by law - yes or no? - DP
It always amazes me in Mediterranean countries where everyone rides motorcycles in shorts and T-shirts / vests. I know the climate plays a part, but the thought of coming off even at 30 mph and having bare skin touching tarmac doesn't bear thinking about.

Riding in anything other than full kit feels horrible to me. It's like driving without a seatbelt - instantly uncomfortable and confidence sapping.

Cheers
DP
Leathers by law - yes or no? - CGNorwich
Yes thats the sort of thing but I think you would need to register your leathers with the DVLA for inclusion in their database.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Old Navy
Why not barcode them and adapt ANPR camera systems to read barcodes as well as number plates? It will only cost a few million and require hundereds of staff to run it.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
The financial impact of a 'Serious' RTC is estimated at about £100.000. Forgetting 'organ donning'
there are to the NHS and rehabilitation costs burdens on the welfare state costs to
employers and extra burdens on colleagues through sickness.


But those costs also apply to people injured in sports, DIY disasters, and general misadventure. If we want to the shared costs of injury and ill-health arising from our socialised health system as a reason to protect people from taking risks which imperil only themselves, then we are basically setting off down a path of nationalising everyone's body.

We'll ban all contact sports, 'cos they cause far too many injuries, and similarly stomp on motor-racing, sailing, swimming in the sea, climbing, rock hill-walking, sky-diving, and any form of exercise other than running on grass or swimming in a pool. Both under supervision, of course, because we can't have anyone injuring themselves through excessive exercise ... and crack down on slobs, we'll make this supervised exercise compulsory for everyone.

While the exercise police look after fitness, the diet police will be swinging through he windows like the Milk Tray Man to arrest people eating chips and missing out on their five-a-day of fruit. Meanwhile the relationship police will be imprisoning married women (who are on average much less happy than single women) and single men (who who are on average much less happy than single men) for endangering their mental health, and after all depression and other psychiatric disorders carry huge social and medical costs.

Is that really a path we want to go down? It's bad enough having nanny-state nagging us about things that are basically our own business, but I'm astonished at how many people want nanny to have more power over us.

The way things are going in the UK, I think that If my return to Ireland goes awry, I should go off and hang out with one of those outlaw militia groups in the Rockies. They may be crazed loons, but even so their outlook sounds much more conducive to happiness than the clipboard-wielding busybodies over here who want to use the law to treat us all like retarded children.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Number_Cruncher
Scary NW, I usually disagree with you.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
Me too! but not this time.

Pat
Leathers by law - yes or no? - dxp55
As a Rocker from the 60-70's I look back with horror at what could have happened to me with just jeans and jacket on - on the one day I wore a helmet I came off big time on gravel left over from the winter of 62-63 and took big chunk out of back of it.
Also I wore seat belts well before they became compulsary because I witnessed a car stop at zebra crossing and Triumph Herald behind locked up in wet and did a wonderful job on rear end of first car - unfortunately the kid sitting in back seat did a head dive between front seats and took his teeth out on dashboard. Unless you see it you don't think it could happen to you - my dream job is being a traffic cop and I would sit at exit of housing estate and fine every single non seat belt wearer on school run and that would be the start - no if's no buts
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
NowWheels, you sound just like an Anarchist ... not the sort of anarchist who one reads about trying to trash the cities etc., but an Anarchist in the true meaning of the word i,e, Rule without Rulers!
Let me know when the boat sails for B.C.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Hamsafar
No.
A motorcycle is ideal for popping to the COOP and suchlike but wouldn't be if you had to dress in full regalia to do it.

I don't think helmets should be either, they aren't on these quads and trikes that seem ever more popular.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - woodster
Fullchat - Organ 'donning' !!! I've done some daft things when no-one's been looking but wearing their deceased body parts.... come to think of it there have been a few gags with dead animals -maybe an occupational comedy thread coming on?
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Cliff Pope
What about a roll-over shark cage? Then they could ride helmetless in swimming trunks and bare feet if they liked.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Lud
NW, I can't help thinking that posting here and hanging out in this virtual place has helped nuance your attitudes a bit. It probably has the same effect on other thoughtful individuals.

I know it's cheeky of me to say that because I believe you have been here longer than I have. But I was struck by people's essentially helpful response to your post on yr plans to add a huge Chelsea tractor to your burgeoning stable to ponce about London in... (sorry, a modest all-terrain vehicle for yr potential Irish smallholding... by the way, I hope that goes satisfactorily and look forward to coming to see you there along with other crazed Toads and the like).

You have become one of us. You may be more one of us than I am even.

I was never a biker, just a rough and ready scooterista, but I went on fast bikes fast with no helmet even. Makes me shudder to remember it. Leathers - good ones that cost a grand a suit - make real sense to a biker.

Edited by Lud on 20/09/2009 at 17:42

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Glaikit Wee Scunner {P}
Today we were passed at high speed on Thirteen Bends by six bikers all wearing full leathers.
On double white lines on blind bends.
Not a plimsoll among them.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - spikeyhead {p}
Our governments have the right to create laws to protect us from others, but no right to create laws to protect us form ourselves.

I do wish they'd remember that more often.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - DP
Leathers -
good ones that cost a grand a suit - make real sense to a biker.


I totally agree with the sentiment, Lud, but the pricing is actually a myth. One of the bike mags known for its rigorous, destructive testing of kit rates certain cheaper leathers higher than certain expensive ones in terms of crash protection. As with all clothing, you can pay for "designer" brand names just as much as quality. It's easy to spend a grand on a suit, as you say, but fashion aside, completely unnecessary.

I'm not going to plug anyone on here, but a certain bike accessory outlet's own brand of protective clothing often comes top, or near top, of these tests despite costing a fraction of the price of similar products from the more well known brands. Their (patented) armour is incredibly effective, and kit is well put together.

As with everything, it comes down to fashion, taste, and budget. Lower cost doesn't necessarily equal less protection though. The same is true, to perhaps a slightly lesser degree, with helmets.

Cheers
DP


Leathers by law - yes or no? - Altea Ego
(patented) armour is incredibly effective and kit is well put together.


And the desire not to look like a hunched up monkey with hip and knee replacements and scoliosis is one reason why I would never wear modern leathers.


Leathers by law - yes or no? - DP
And the desire not to look like a hunched up monkey with hip and knee
replacements and scoliosis is one reason why I would never wear modern leathers.


Heh heh - I know what you mean.This is the genius of the armour I am referring to. It's soft and pliable, and bends to your body shape. It's also far less bulky than the conventional foam / kevlar stuff.

Having known people come off bikes to have the medical staff who've put them back together credit body armour with preventing them spending the rest of their lives in wheelchairs, even the hard stuff is an inconvenience worth tolerating in my opinion.

You look a bit of a dork riding in a hi-vis jacket, but if it stops one SMIDSY from wrecking your day, or even life, it's well worth it.

None of this of course is a substitute for riding with the appropriate care, and anticipating the road ahead.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Martin Devon
2nd best post of the year.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Martin Devon
Nowwheels that is at 23.18 yesterday.

MD
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Altea Ego
I had a fairly serious motorbike accident at the age of 18. T boned a car that came out of a side turning, hit it at 40 ish mph.

It was an over the top of the car job, and 15 - 20 yards down the road freestyle.

I had a broken collar bone, and a broken nose (caused by the helmet coming down on the bridge of my nose). I was wearing trainers jeans and a denim jacket. Clothes ruined but very little gravel rash (mostly hands - wasn't wearing gloves). Probably because the type of accident meant I was rolling, it wasn't a slide down the road job.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - J Bonington Jagworth
"the clipboard-wielding busybodies over here who want to use the law to treat us all like retarded children"

Great post, NW. Worthy of The Growler...
Leathers by law - yes or no? - NowWheels
Great post NW. Worthy of The Growler...


Oh my goodness! I never thought I'd be compared to him.

Wonder what he'd have made of that?
Leathers by law - yes or no? - L'escargot
I'd prefer that the available supply of leather was used for shoes instead.

Edited by L'escargot on 21/09/2009 at 08:58

Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
Over the last week or so, I've been cutting back my hedges which are up to 4mtrs high & to all 4 sides of the house.
I tape up one of the handle controls so I can use my hedge trimmer with one hand in places - I know the dangers involved but that fact, or any law - would not stop me from doing what I have to do, and I am prepared to accept whatever consequences may come from my actions.
When I take my 6 stone Rhodesian Ridgeback out 7 days a week. he is always off the lead - in fact I never take it with me, but I am 100% in control of the dog where other people or animals are concerned.
When I lived on the Bodmin Moor, I used to regularly ride my 500cc motorsickle in shorts, T shirt and no helmet in the knowledge that I was breaking the law of the land.
I am totally against the ban on smoking in pubs - life-long smokers having to puff away outside like 2nd class citizens - perhaps drinking in pubs should be banned for all the damage that it can (and does) cause in towns and cities the world over.
So no, the wearing of Leathers should not be compulsory IMO.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - helicopter
I too shudder when I consider the risks I used to take on motorbikes, riding without helmet before they became compulsory and leathers but whilst I have some scars from coming off I hate this nanny state and I see no point in people being forced to wear leathers and just hope that people are sensible enough to look out for themselves.

Just to show the folly of trying to legislate for everything.

Now Wheels said to ban any form of exercise other than running on grass or swimming in a pool. Both under supervision, of course, .......

The only time I ever ended up in hospital with broken bones was swimming in a pool ( under supervision of two lifeguards ) when a guy dived in deep from the side and surfacing again at speed with his head breaking three of my ribs.....a pure accident which resulted in me being off work for six weeks.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
perro I envy you for your 500cc Bodmin experience!

What common sense you have!

I believe everyone should have the right to weigh up the pleasure gained against the risk of harming themselves, in anything they do.

Not being able to feel the wind in my hair resulted in me moving to the Fen!
Not quite the same thing :)

I've had to get up early to post on here this morning as IE is STILL hanging all day despite me reading it is cured and all threads about it being locked:(

Pat
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>Not being able to feel the wind in my hair resulted in me moving to the Fen<<<

Ah! you must know Grantchester meadow then Pat ~
www.ukstudentlife.com/Travel/Tours/England/Grantch...m

I would never ride a motorbike on 'the open road' as such, but the area of Bodmin Moor I rode was more or less traffic free most of the time - quite near to the Jamaica Inn.

I'm also not able to access HJ via IE, but no problems with opera at all at all :)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
I certainly do Perro! although I'm a little further North.
I can also use this website perfectly at 03.30 as usual, despite it feezing ALL day yesterday.

Again there is a locked post about it, but with new posts on so I am confused to say the least:(

Just to be 'on topic' there is a lane going deep into the Fen past our house and trips in shorts and no helmet, on a GS1400 are wonderful!!


Pat
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>on a GS1400 are wonderful!!<<<

So ... I have this image of you zooming down the lane 'on a shredder'?
www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/garden-shredders/blac...p

(haha!) Some machine though - now I envy you! + the East has had a luvly summer whereas here it has been wet, wet, wet, - good name for a group! and speaking of groups, that's how I came by Grantchester Meadow - the title of a tune by some psychedelic band from back in the mists of time.

I would strongly recommend you download opera Pat, I know the way you feel about it, but it'll just sit there on your desktop, not affecting anything on your computer, you might even grow to like it - like me!
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Dipstick
"......the title of a tune by some psychedelic band from back in the mists of time."

There was a 2005 song called Grantchester Meadow by Candlelight, whoever they may be - but I suspect you're thinking of Pink Floyd.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>but I suspect you're thinking of Pink Floyd.<<<

That's right Dipstick - I've been a BIG fan of said band for over 40 years now and have every album they produced - 50% of the original line-up have died now alas :(
I shall check out Candlelight on youtube :)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Dipstick
Well, shows how much I know about music post 1969. Grantchester Meadow is the name of the 2005 group, and Candelight is the track.

In case you care.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
Nope! can't find any group by that name Dipstick, I found this though - The mellow tones of a 350 V8 ... now *that's* music!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcwhzP06g_U
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Dipstick
www.amazon.com/Candlelight/dp/B000TPIEEA


Positively psychedelic. Far out man, which is fine if you are a spaced out hippy, chick or otherwise, but not so useful for those of us that are still hep cats. How very square.


Sorry. This is WAY off topic. Please do moderate, daddy-o.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>www.amazon.com/Candlelight/dp/B000TPIEEA<<<

Wow! The background artwork is straight out of 'The Summer of Love'

Getting back to the OP, in 68 i.e before crash helmets became compulsory, I used to wear a sort of corduroy cap just like Donovan used to wear (whoever he is!)
I used to ride a Lambretta GT 200, followed by an SX 200 onto which I fitted a carb off the GP 225 ... it never did run right after that, so I part ex'd it for a Suzuki GT250 followed by a Honda 550/4 followed by a Honda CX500 custom (U.S.)
Personally. I found scooters to be absolutely lethal in wet weather, and its a wonder I'm still here to tell the tale!
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Altea Ego
I too started on scooters, a Lambo LD 150 then moved to an Li 150. (after that it was a proper ducati bike)

For the lambo I wore a natty white peaked open faced helmet, with a parka.
The brakes were rubbish, the handling was appalling and the silly little tyres absolutely shocking in the wet. I didn't care i was young and invincible.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
>>> - I've been a BIG fan of said band for over 40 years now and have every album they produced <<<<<

You'll appreciate all 9 parts of Shine On You Crazy Diamond then :)
Absolutely perfect music to drive a lorry to in the wee small hours!

Are we starting a Mods v Rockers twist to this becaus Rockers ( proper bikers!) wear leather, Mods (scooterists) wear Parkas.

I once got lectured at the railway crossing gates in Oakham for riding an Aerial Leader in a yellow kaftan, by a motorbike copper.............he had no sense of fun at all!

Pat


Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>You'll appreciate all 9 parts of Shine On You Crazy Diamond then<<<

Eh? I make it 2.
I was neither mod nor rock really Pat, I suppose if anything I 'became' a Hippie for a short time, although I still am really (mentally :) ...I remember some awful mustard colour needle cord strides that I cut up and used to flare the leg bottoms of my Levi's, all set off with an army surplus greatcoat (hahaha!)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>>I too started on scooters, a Lambo LD 150 then moved to an Li 150<<<

The old LD/LI 150's must be worth a few bob these days!
I had an 'open faced' as well - orange :) + the parka of course.

>>>I didn't care i was young and invincible<<< Shine on! (you crazy diamond)

Leathers by law - yes or no? - helicopter
Very easy to fall off a scooter when braking in wet weather. I had an LD150 for a while in mid 60's .

I then bought a brand new J125 Starstream on the 'never never 'on which I travelled from South London all over the country, Cornwall and Stratford ( on Avon) and Northumberland . Seriously bum numbing but all I could afford when I was that age...

Now don't laugh but my wet weather gear was ( seriously ) a policemans cape bought from the local surplus stores which smelled to high heaven of vulcanised rubber.

When worn over the army surplus haversack I used to carry my gear in I must have looked like Quasimodo.... or if the wind got under it a large vampire bat .


So I then graduated to bikes and bought a Bonneville for £90 in around 1969 ... but 6 months later it died on the old A1 after pumping its life blood ( oil ) all over my boots and seizing up.

I sold it for spares for £25 to a dealer in Lincoln.Nearly broke my heart losing £65 like that when I suppose I was on around £12 a week.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Lud
Never rode a Vespa, but various Lambrettas. The only scooter I actually owned was a rough Zundapp Bella. 200cc I think. It had an electric starter that always worked, but the gear linkage or box had been abused by a previous owner, making gear selection, or anyway selection of the gear you wanted and no other, a noisy hit-or-miss nightmare, and I didn't improve them. It was supposed to be able to do 70 but fortunately it couldn't.

Scootering did various things as well as freezing your gonads off and making your hands numb. It made them strong and calloused too, and ensured that you never ever had clean nails, not that I often had clean nails anyway or often do to this day. Shuffling paper, let alone grovelling under floorboards and fitting new spotlights in the sitting room, which I have just been doing, make you just as filthy.

The only other activity that changed me physically as much as riding a scooter was being a building labourer. After a couple of months of that my fingers had become sausage-like to my gaze and looked capable of strangling a sheep.

To my horror I began to notice that my responses, attitudes and views were also becoming hulking, insensitive and not all that brilliant. Not sure they have ever recovered.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Lud
changed me physically as much as riding a scooter


Sorry to be boring, but I have just remembered that 20 or 25 years ago I laid a quite large second-hand tongue-and-groove mahogany parquet floor upstairs. Although it felt at the time as if it was killing me quite quickly, by the end of the operation I could get into all sorts of old pairs of jeans and could skip up six flights of stairs like a nipper.

No longer alas. But I've never been as porky again as I was in my thirties, wearing suits and having an expense account.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - perro
>>> let alone grovelling under floorboards and fitting new spotlights in the sitting room,<<<

Were you expecting a visit from the CIA then Lud?

I couldn't place the Zundapp, but I remember it now - sounds more like a motorsickle than a scooter ~
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-or0CjIbrBY
Leathers by law - yes or no? - BobbyG
Last week I was cycling (pedal) home from work when I got knocked off my bike by a pedestrian no less! He decided not to use the two things either side of his nose...

Anyway, I was doing no more than 15mph at the time and now have -
broken toe
badly bruised foot
no skin from shin to kneecap
skint fingers (was wearing gloves)
bruised arm
bruised thigh
broken rib

I am still limping and on 500mg painkillers.

All the above was at 15mph, I just can't believe anyone would consider doing 60mph wearing shorts and t shirt! The thought of sliding across tarmac at that speed.... sends a shiver down my (very painful) back!

But each to their own!

However much as I hate Govt interference, I do believe there are certain rules that have been introduced for all our benefits eg. seat belt, smoking bans etc.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Altea Ego
500mg painkillers.

I thought you sweaties were tough! you wimp.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - BobbyG
I thought you sweaties were tough! you wimp

I never told you how the tarmac faired.......
Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
But surely we should have the right to chose whether to protect ourselves or not.
Life is boring without risk.

Pat
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Westpig
Life is boring without risk.

You are right Pat...but there's times when that's acceptable and times when it's not. I know we all have different standards, but surely there has to be a 'norm' in there somewhere.

For example; motorcycle racing is dangerous. I'd liken it to mountaineering, extreme potholing or whatever. If people want to do it and get a rush from, it, good luck to them. If it all goes wrong and the rest of us have to cough up for it in medical care, insurance claims or similar, then to me, that's acceptable.

However, if someone fancies doing the commute to work in the summer on a m/c in shorts and a t-shirt....the I do object to paying for his NHS treatment and insurance claim etc... because IMO that's just plain stupid.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Robin Reliant
I mostly wore leathers on a motorcycle, and of course the oblgatory helmet. But on the local "Mountain" I regularly descend at 50mph+ on my bicycle wearing just shorts and jersey and I never bother with a helmet.

No logic in that at all, but I wouldn't do it any other way. And I have a cigarette when I get home.

Viva freedom.
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Alby Back
Tee Hee RR....me too ! I've even been known to get "big air" on my tread-iron or on skis with a stogie clamped in my jaws. Nothing to be proud of I know but............

;-)
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Ben 10
YES
Leathers by law - yes or no? - pda
WP, you're absolutely right, but I'm sure the reason there is so little common sense about these days is because everyone has stopped having to think for themselves regarding danger.

If we're allowed to do it then it must be safe, and if we have a High Viz on we're invincible.

Pat
Leathers by law - yes or no? - Westpig
but I'm sure the reason there is so little common sense about these days is >>because everyone has stopped having to think for themselves regarding danger.
If we're allowed to do it then it must be safe and if we have a High Viz on we're invincible.


You are so right.

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Birdie
Leathers by law? Nooooooooooo!!!!

Objecting to the potential consequences of choices made by someone else (ie riding in shorts or a t shirt) is the begining of the end of everything, as already said.

Making things compulsory can also bring out the law of unintended consequences...

For instance, man in compulsory leathers falls from motor cycle. The accident doesn't hurt him that much, but he winds up in hospital anyway. Why? Because he passed out with heat stroke as a result of being horribly over dressed for the prevailing warm weather.

Or a perhaps more pertinant example, compulsory seatbelts. Yes causualties among vehicle occupants dropped, but if my memory serves didn't pedestrian injuries increase?

So often now people claim rights without acknowledging any responsabilities.

As a motorcyclist I take responsibility for my own scar tissue, which I believe gives me to ride in shorts if I so choose.

Although only down the lane with PDA when the weathers nice ;)

Leathers by law - yes or no? - Harleyman
I rarely ride without at least a proper jacket these days. On the rare occasions when I do nip down to the shop wearing just jeans and T-shirt (NEVER shorts!) I am naturally more aware of my vulnerability and consequently ride in a more cautious manner. I don't do this deliberately it just happens.

Agree totally with Birdie's comments. The safer drivers feel in their own cage, the less likely they are to think of the safety of others; hence my admiration for Clarkson's "sharp spike" theory.

My own pet hate is full-face helmets; I find them restrictive, uncomfortable and claustrophobic, furthermore being a devotee of open-face lids I have no option but to slow down in heavy rain which can only be a good thing.

I have never (despite being a member) understood MAG's obsession with repealing the helmet law though. The only time I ever choose to ride without one is on the thankfully rare occasions when I am in a fellow biker's funeral procession, where the police generally have the good sense and courtesy to turn a blind eye. Even then I feel no compulsion to blast down the road at any high speed sans lid.