Rider Requalification???

[eljeffe]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051126/ap_on_re_us/boomer_bikers

Now, if they decided to do this for all types of motor vehicles, I could get behind an idea like this. But to single out motorcyclists only? Bullshit!

[amarider]

I'm all for Riders education, but this sounds like the Motorcyclist is being mandated to learn how to better dodge bad car drivers that are not required to learn how to drive. :rolleyes:

[Dochatley]

They failed to mention how many of those accidents involved DUI. I saw some stats on that recently and it was mind boggling. There are a few who would benefit from a refresher course but you like to think they are smart enough to realize that and do it.

[sanjaun2]

It figures, The state of Washington showing their stupidity again. There must be a hidden revenue maker at the bottom of this. I have had a license in NY, NM, Co, and Ca. When I moved to Wa I had to take both written and driving tests over again. And thats just for a car. The woman giving me the test spoke almost no english. I had to wait hours in line to take the written exam. If I were spanish or Russian I would have went to another line with only a 5 minute wait.

[rixchard]

Let me see if I understand your position.

It is a good thing to have group A's proficiency in skill 'X' retested from time to time, but if they are not retesting skill 'Y' on group B then it is stupid thing

Does this sum up your statement or have I misinterpreted somewhere?

[eljeffe]

Let me see if I understand your position.

It is a good thing to have group A's proficiency in skill 'X' retested from time to time, but if they are not retesting skill 'Y' on group B then it is stupid thing

Does this sum up your statement or have I misinterpreted somewhere?

I'm saying that if they require retesting for motorcyclists, they should retest drivers of all motor vehicles (cars, trucks, busses, etc...). Retesting just motorcyclists is discriminatory and addressing the wrong root causes for most motorcycle accidents (alcohol and other drivers, usually in cars)

[rixchard]

So your basic complaint is that life is not fair? :)


I agree, all people who take part in activities that can be deadly to those around them (i.e. driving) should be required recertify themelves in the execution of those activities from time to time. Why not just consider this a trial balloon to see if the public will buy into the concept?

[meese]

Sure the public will buy in, until it comes time when they have to be tested. You see, motorcycles are bad and dangerous, but cars are normal. Didn't most car drivers pass their tests at age 16, after extensive schoolyard training? That should safely see them through the next 70 years or so.

Many bikers are aware of the increased risks and skill associated with motorcycles, and take appropriate measures to be prepared. But forcing this on them while ignoring the far larger group of insufficiently skilled drivers is ludicrous, and does fall under a sort of discrimination.

How many car drivers do you know that care about enhancing their driving abilities through voluntary training and skills development? How many can't even be bothered with the most rudimentary aspects of safety, besides the enforced seat belt laws? How many think their cars are just an extension of their homes, or of their persons? And how many do you see driving in an obviously reckless manner (cell phones, food, reading, etc.), while just assuming that their little insulated boxes will protect them from the world?

And that ignores the huge number of undocumented and uninsured drivers.

Sure, there are a large number of returning bikers, who could probably use a refresher course at the least. But there are a far larger number of just plain dangerous drivers that need to be addressed as well.

Maybe that covers the crux of the argument a little better?

[gulfxray]

Looks like it is us old guys (and gals) over 40 that are the problem. How old are you now Jeff? Just funnin' ya man! ;)

Could the fact there are so darn many of us over 40 have anything to do with the number of fatalities in the age bracket? This looks like the same old thing that gets rehashed every year or so....

Seriously, I had to take the written and driving test to get my Motorcycle endorsement here in the great state of Oklahoma. Between both tests, nether did anything to give any semblance of making me a competent LT rider - fact of the matter is, I had ridden the LT only 50 illegal miles before the test (the 1st I had ridden in 20+ years). To be honest, I shouldn't have been on an LT at the time...

I think we all would agree that experience and actually based training is what makes us better riders and/or determines if we are at least competent. Heck, I am still learning and I bet you are to...

I'll look forward to national study like the Hurt Report and the changes to all vehicular licensing/training it brings...

I am with Jeff on this one. Don't single me out because I ride a motorcycle - if I have to requalify, then so should every other licensed motor vehicle operator.


ps - wake me when we get in to talking about annual vehicle safety inspections....

[DavidTaylor]

Now, if they decided to do this for all types of motor vehicles, I could get behind an idea like this. But to single out motorcyclists only? Bullshit!

I agree 100%. Singling out motorcyclists for this is discriminatory at best. I would like to see the stats from a similar study of car drivers and a push to impose the same rules on them. The uproar opposing that would be gigantic. I think it's a great idea if applied to all vehicle operators.

[RaffyK]

... The uproar opposing that would be gigantic. I think it's a great idea if applied to all vehicle operators.


The car/truck riding public is the 800lb gorilla, while us m/c riders are small in comaprison. It's easier to pass legislation that affects a small group then to pass one that affects a much larger group.

[DavidTaylor]

Why not just consider this a trial balloon to see if the public will buy into the concept?

If the trial balloon was applied to all vehicles and not just motorcycles I would be all for it. It would make more sense to apply this to a segment of all drivers, say those who have been licensed without a retest for over 20 years, or those with 2 or more points on their record at license renewal time, since it could be surmised that these groups are at higher risk due to length of time with no re-education and exhibited lack of obeyance/understanding of the traffic code, respectively. Applying it to a group because of the vehicle they choose to drive would not be an objective test of the system, and is discriminatory in the basic assumption that operating that vehicle makes you a worse driver that needs more training than others.

[hawg]

Hmmm....

On the other hand...I sure do see a lot of riders who do NOT know how to ride when I am out on the streets! Might be a good idea. In fact, why the hell should anybody be able to buy a motorcycle without a motorcycle endorsement?

I dunno...it just might be needed because we are our own worst enemy.

[nath3an]

Hummm... require people to go through training when getting licensed for a kind of vehicle they have not driven in 20 years. That sounds just about right to me. I had a 15-year hiatus between bikes, and taking the Foundation's safety course before riding again was one of the smartest thing's I've ever done.

Of course, WA state could word their law to include all vehicles, but I doubt it would impact many cage drivers. Anyone who hasn't driven a car in 20 years and wants to start again probably already knows they need a refresher course.

Nath3an

[patrick2000]

"Tim Bouche, president of the cycle manufacturers' Motorcycle Safety Foundation, said officials should consider that older riders are the largest group of riders, not just the largest group of fatal crashes."

11/28/05 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051126/ap_on_re_us/boomer_bikers

First of all I think they meant "Tim Buche" president of the MSF who is affiliated with the Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC). Those of you who have kept up on the MCNs recent articles concerning a conflict of interest in rider training should be able to make the connection here.

Since when did the MSF become " the cycle manufacturers' Motorcycle Safety Foundation" this confuses me. Can someone please explain if , or when this merger happened?
As a Rider Training Instructor I agree that there is a need for further education in all areas and within every segment of this sport we love. I become suspicious when the most populous participants with the the best ability to pay are being singled out to receive further education.

[early1]

Hmmm....

On the other hand...I sure do see a lot of riders who do NOT know how to ride when I am out on the streets! Might be a good idea. In fact, why the hell should anybody be able to buy a motorcycle without a motorcycle endorsement?

I dunno...it just might be needed because we are our own worst enemy.
Since when in the USA don't you have the right to be your own worst enemy.
"Life ,Liberty and the Pursuit---"
Sound even vaguely familiar to any of you???
I do not desire a Government that is ,at this rate, soon to determine how often I need to wash behind my ears or that a Big Mac is Toooo hazardous to eat .
Exageration?? "Not Hardly" as the Duke might have said.

[Dochatley]

Table

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/figures/m347a2t.gif
Return to top. (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5347a2.htm#top)

Figure

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/figures/m347a2f.gif
For a full report go to http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5347a2.htm

[rspyder]

I agree that you should be required to show either a motorcycle license or MSF course completion certificate before purchasing a bike. You cannot purchase a car unless you have a drivers license.

[eljeffe]

You cannot purchase a car unless you have a drivers license.

Not true in all states. Same goes for motorcycles.

[bmwrider79]

I think there is already to much government in our lives. How about holding people resposible for their actions.

I know in every accident there are varing degress of resposibility. might be 1% you 99% other guy or 50-50 fault. That is for the courts or insurance Co's to decide.

I have said all along the test for the motorcycle is far more complicated than for a car. The average 6th grader that can see over the wheel of the car can pass the tests both written and driving. Can they handle the resposibility? Most likey not, but that is the level of test for the cage. But for the bike there is much more to master both book and physical skill. WHY?

Most of us LTer's believe in Training from what I have read. Other goroups particularly the V-Twin crowd is not quite as enthusiastic about traning.

Boils down to personal responsibility. I will continue to educate myself thru reading and praticing my skills in safe areas not because the Gov't say so but because I choose to!

[patrick2000]

[QUOTE=bmwrider79]I think there is already to much government in our lives. How about holding people resposible for their actions.

Mike,

If you delve a little deeper into this issue I think you may be surprised by the source. A good place to start would be MCNs (Motor Cycle News) recent series regarding trouble in rider education. Learn what you can about Mr Buche, the MSF and the Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC). I think you may find that it is not an issue of more government but a product of market monopolization coming from the most unlikely sources. As I intrpret it , this not about more government in our lives, but profiteering entities using government to extract wealth from our pockets in a free market economy.

Local and State governments are neither equipped nor capable of research that would justify the said proposal. The legislatures depend on experts to provide info necessary for their decisions. In this case it might be more appropriate to research the relationship between the MSF and the MIC and determine if their goals are profit driven , or if they are really thinking of rider education? I sincerely doubt the MIC ,or the MSF is lobbying for more government intervention in older motorcyclists lives just to support big government.

As always this issue is much more complicated than the article depicts. I will refrain from explaining the events of the last several years that produce proposals such as this.

[pjessen]

So, half (48.7%) of fatals in the 40-50 age group are include alcohol…are the other 51.3% due to lack of training?

If each fatal would have been required to get an endorsement, would they have learned not to drink and ride? Would they have learned enough about safety to buy and wear a helmet where the state does not require it?

Naah, it’s a social requirement in the majority of riding groups in the 40-60 age groups to not wear a helmet or protective gear. ( More than 600,000 cruisers sold each year) The dealers don’t require an endorsement, so what is the motivation for training? Oh, and the meeting places to show and discuss the bikes is mid day to midnight and they serve alcohol. Are we surprised at the stats?

If I read the Washington state concerns correctly, they will concentrate on improving training, but do nothing to enforce drinking laws, so after all the proposed training is in place, half of the accident causes (alcohol) will remain unchanged…is this correct?

Harley, Honda and the rest; over 990,000 in annual sales. BMW, 13k total. We are such a small tail on a big, ugly dog. We are at the mercy of the huge majority, and therefore are not representative of anything! After the hand wringing, our only choice is to just go ahead and wear ATGATT, get recurrent training voluntarily, and don’t drink while enjoying our ABS-equipped lovely bikes. And that’s OK by me!!!

[Steve_R]

I'm on your side Pete. See you and Connie in Georgia next summer.

Cheers

[bmwrider79]

[QUOTE=patrick2000] Mike, If you delve a little deeper into this issue I think you may be surprised by the source. A good place to start would be MCNs (Motor Cycle News) recent series regarding trouble in rider education. Learn what you can about Mr Buche, the MSF and the Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC). I think you may find that it is not an issue of more government but a product of market monopolization coming from the most unlikely sources. As I intrpret it , this not about more government in our lives, but profiteering entities using government to extract wealth from our pockets in a free market economy.

Response:
I Have read that series also. The MSF may need to be redone. Both as a corporation & training cirruculum. Dumbing down the program is not a good idea. It should all be about learning skills not just enough to get you going.


Quote:
Local and State governments are neither equipped nor capable of research that would justify the said proposal. The legislatures depend on experts to provide info necessary for their decisions. In this case it might be more appropriate to research the relationship between the MSF and the MIC and determine if their goals are profit driven , or if they are really thinking of rider education? I sincerely doubt the MIC ,or the MSF is lobbying for more government intervention in older motorcyclists lives just to support big government. [END of Quote]


Response
I agree here also. But with the bad press we get, inexperienced riders out there, and thow in the the DUI factor, the well intentioned Goodwrenches of society & government want to pass a law that will do nothing except make them feel good & be a PITA to us motorcyclists.

Helmet laws are a great case in point. Yes they save lives look a Florida as a recent example. Could not the insurance companies offer discount to us helmet wearers? Private industry or insurance companies don't like this idea. Seat belt laws they like, since sooner or later they will attempt to deny claims for those that did not wear them in a accident. Many states have laws that prevent this. But did we ever imagine Mandatory seat belt laws or insurance? So much for less govt in our lives. Hey was not the madatory insurance supposed to LOWER our rates? yeah right.

[rspyder]

I have to ask.

In which state is is legal to purchase a car at a dealer and drive off in it without a license?

[early1]

I have to ask.

In which state is is legal to purchase a car at a dealer and drive off in it without a license?
Don't know about elsewhere ,but I bought my Aunt's Lincoln by phone (John Eagle Dallas,Tx), showed up with a cashiers check and drove off without anyone asking for mine or her license.

[eljeffe]

No state that I know of requires a driver's license to purchase a vehicle. I've purchased cars with cash and credit in NM, AZ, CO, OK, TX, and FL, and never once needed to show a driver's license. In fact, in NM and TX, you don't even need a drivers license to title and register a vehicle in your name.

[hoog62]

Purchasing the car, and driving it off are two separate things. A dealership cannot stop you from driving your car without a licence, a demo is another story.

[tmgs]

Looks like it is us old guys (and gals) over 40 that are the problem. How old are you now Jeff? Just funnin' ya man! ;)



ps - wake me when we get in to talking about annual vehicle safety inspections....


ok we are there <grin>

I miss them, or at least I did when i was working on cars for a living <g>

retesting is a joke, (ok you can turn your bike around in a parking lot(some states MC/CAR tests are too easy) maybe improved driver training for all every 10 years or so.

Tom

[jtalbot]

Here is something to ponder

I obtained my motorcycle license in 1980 at the ripe old age of 26. I bought and rode a Kawasaki KZ-650 for a year and sold it. Back then you went out took your written test and could operate your own bike as long as you were with someone who was legally licensed to operate a motorcycle. The licensed operator was suppose to watch you and give you operating tips. After you got so,e rode time you could take your driving class in a coned off parking lot. You can still obtain your motorcycle license the same way here in Colorado. In 2004 at the ripe old age of 50, I bought a brand new Honda VTX-1800 and honed my skills on that beast after not riding for over 20 years. I could have taken an experienced motorcycle operators class but after having not ridded for almost 25 years I thought I would practice on the streets of Denver. I survived...

In 2004, my wife did what most new licensed riders do. Take a MSF class. The class lasted Friday night and all day Saturday and Sunday. She and her classmates became well versed in operating 250cc, 300 pound motorcyles in a coned off parking lot. If you pass the class like she did you can go down to the DMV to receive a motorcycle endorsement on your vehicle operators license. She could then go out and legally operate a 1200cc 832 pound motorcycle. I watched her class and I would be willing to say that over 50% of her classmates were elderly (over 40).

After she was legally licensed to operate a motorcycle, we hit the high roads and began our life long (what is left of it) motorcycle operators course. After reading the responses written so far and reviewing my wife's and my experiences, I wonder if it is the system (MSF like ABATE Colorado and state DMV's) that instills a sense of safety and security behind the handle bars. I am not bashing any MSF institution or governmental agency. What I am say is look at the product the system produces.

Motorcycle and automobile safety training is not the same and it never will be. Yes operating a motorcycle is dangerous, I was an EMT-Paramedic for 14 years. I was always looking down, never looking up. Hopefully that will remain the same. Since July 2004, I have safely operated a VTX, GS, RT, and now LT and ridden over 20,000 miles without a mishap. I operate my motorcycles as if it won't.

[early1]

In fact, in NM and TX, you don't even need a drivers license to title and register a vehicle in your name.
Come to think of it your right, I registered the Lincoln to her,without her being there and without her license or license #,and registered the LT to me without my license or # being requested.

[tmgs]

Here is something to ponder

I obtained my motorcycle license in 1980 at the ripe old



FL didn't require a motorcycle edorsement untill well after '80 I think sometime around '86-'87??


You can still obtain your motorcycle license the same way here in Colorado. In 2004 at the ripe old age of 50, I



In GA. my daughter was able to get her MC permit easier than a auto permit, no driver training required at all for the MC license, in fact she had a full MC license permit long before her auto license ., she had a learning permit to drive the car and a MC license (yes she held two drivers license here in ga)

Funny but true

Tom

[Ron_Kendall]

In fact, in NM and TX, you don't even need a drivers license to title and register a vehicle in your name.

Same in Illinois...I had a 12 year old nephew own a car... he didn't drive it, just wanted to learn how to work on it and fix it up till he could get a licence.

[pjessen]

I have to ask.

In which state is is legal to purchase a car at a dealer and drive off in it without a license?

Now you wouldn't want to spoil most of the used car market, would you? ;)