The question...... (How to decrease motorcycle fatalities)

[serazin]

All registered non-op I imagine....

-jim

Some but not all. Helps if the potential buyer can try it out. Can't do that with non-op.

So, what I got so far is this:

1. Require dealerships to ensure that new buyers have an M1.
2. Require all new riders to go through a rider safety course.
3. Stiffer penalties for persons operating vehicles without proper endorsements and/or licenses.

What about putting together a video that is handed to all new bike owners promoting safety, testimonials from riders and family members of fallen riders, and basic equipment issues. Can't force people to watch it, but if it helps one rider, wouldn't that be the payoff?

I have been thinking about this all day and two of the three things mentioned above is sort of what I was leaning toward.

1.) I think I agree that a dealer should require a rider to have a M1 before a buyer rides a bike off the lot. But, what if they pick the bike up with a trailer or truck? Or, your dad buys you a bike. He doesn't ride or have a M1. Can one be legally required to have a license to operate a vehicle if they are not operating it?

2.) All new riders through a safety course. Yes, I can get behind this. Along with this I see a need to educate drivers about motorcycles.

3.) Number 3...ah...well we can't keep the unlicensed, uninsured, illegal alien drivers off the road now so how are we going to police another group too? Now it seems like the only time one of the illegals gets caught now is when they get in a crash and are too injured or their car too damaged to run. Oh, or they are too stoned to try to run. (yeah, I know it not just illegal alien invaders. So include doper hillbillies it there as well.)

Quite frankly , I am going to be really pissed if bikes start getting stopped in check points to be checked for papers and it is not done to drivers as well. PC or not, I'm more than a little tired of it.

 

[DataDan]

It is probably obvious, but of those you quoted before, how many of those where the rider was at fault were caused by those with and with out M endorsements?

My study of 2006 Bay Area deaths included 71 crashes. However, the 27 sportbike crashes are the only ones I looked at in enough detail to determine cause (it's a time-consuming process, so I focused on the bikes that would be of interest here at BARF).

Of the sportbike crashes, I found that 19 were clearly the fault of the rider. Of the 19, 7 involved improperly licensed riders while 12 riders had valid licenses with an M endorsement.

I also found that in 7 sportbike crashes another driver was either solely (2) or partially responsible (5). Of the 7 riders in those crashes, 4 were improperly licensed.

Also, DataDan, curious of your thoughts on something. Reading the data from the website I posted earlier it appears a large % of accidents were the results of driver error.

6. In the multiple vehicle accidents, the driver of the other vehicle violated the motorcycle right-of-way and caused the accident in two-thirds of those accidents.

7. The failure of motorists to detect and recognize motorcycles in traffic is the predominating cause of motorcycle accidents. The driver of the other vehicle involved in collision with the motorcycle did not see the motorcycle before the collision, or did not see the motorcycle until too late to avoid the collision.​

However, the data you provided really pointed to rider error as the majority cause.

Is this just a difference in collection of the data or am I misinterpreting the data?

Those are the conclusions of Harry Hurt's study of 900 crashes in LA County in the 1970s and included crashes of all severities. My study of Bay Area sportbike crashes includes only fatal crashes because those are the ones for which data is available. Maybe because of the severity that resulted in death, these 27 fatal crashes are different than the 900 crashes Hurt studied.

The 19 multiple-vehicle crashes included 11 that were unequivocally caused by the rider:

• 5 head-on where rider crossed centerline and hit oncoming vehicle
• 2 riders who ran red lights and hit crossing vehicle
• 1 stunt gone wrong and hit another motorcycle
• 1 high-speed rear-ender
• 1 rider hit curb, went down, and was then hit by another vehicle
• 1 hit vehicle while passing it when that vehicle turned left

The 5 I classified as mutually at fault were all intersection crashes, and the rider's contribution was excessive speed, as reported by the police who did the investigation. I suspect that Hurt would have put 100% fault on the driver in those cases.

 

[jbt56]

This is an interesting topic, with no clear answer. In my opinion, there are a couple things that will stop any effort from succeeding. One is that we have to remember that almost every single person, when asked, will opine that they are at least an "above average" driver. That means that as horribly as some people drive, THEY believe they are the next Jeff Gordon. Next, many people do not like to drive. This group sees driving as a necessary evil to get from A to B. They have absolutely no interest in improving their skills, as it is highly unpleasant to them. Many of this group are your phone talkers, texters, etc., trying to pass the time. Now, look at many riders. Young men (teens - 20's) have huge egos. Many are insecure enough to vehemently deny they are less than Valentino Rossi's coach on a motorcycle, and will hit you if you suggest it- even after said rider blows a 25 mph turn, or forgets to put his foot down at a red light.
Many of the ideas throughout this thread are good, but IMO, they give too much credit to people. As someone posted before... You want to stop bike crashes, get rid of bikes. You want to get rid of DUIs, get rid of booze (not cars & bikes!).
In America in the 21st Century, you cannot hold people responsible for their actions. THAT is the biggest problem. No one will stand up and be accountable, and society will not force them to as it used to. As long as that remains true, the "So what" attitude noted in a previous post will continue.
There IS an answer, but it involves ALL of us playing our part as members of a thinking society.

 

[Joebar4000]

This is an interesting topic, with no clear answer. In my opinion, there are a couple things that will stop any effort from succeeding. One is that we have to remember that almost every single person, when asked, will opine that they are at least an "above average" driver. That means that as horribly as some people drive, THEY believe they are the next Jeff Gordon. Next, many people do not like to drive. This group sees driving as a necessary evil to get from A to B. They have absolutely no interest in improving their skills, as it is highly unpleasant to them. Many of this group are your phone talkers, texters, etc., trying to pass the time. Now, look at many riders. Young men (teens - 20's) have huge egos. Many are insecure enough to vehemently deny they are less than Valentino Rossi's coach on a motorcycle, and will hit you if you suggest it- even after said rider blows a 25 mph turn, or forgets to put his foot down at a red light.
Many of the ideas throughout this thread are good, but IMO, they give too much credit to people. As someone posted before... You want to stop bike crashes, get rid of bikes. You want to get rid of DUIs, get rid of booze (not cars & bikes!).
In America in the 21st Century, you cannot hold people responsible for their actions. THAT is the biggest problem. No one will stand up and be accountable, and society will not force them to as it used to. As long as that remains true, the "So what" attitude noted in a previous post will continue.
There IS an answer, but it involves ALL of us playing our part as members of a thinking society.

Sadly, I think you're right.

However, you have to wonder why people in other countries have higher driving standards, yet similar lifestyles and attitudes. What you describe is in common with many Western nations, but the driving in them is different.

Germany is *the* example that disproves the saying, 'You can't legislate behaviour'. That said, it probably took YEARS for having pride in driving, to start to take effect.

But the laws did pull shitty drivers off the road in the meantime, as they do in other countries.

Seems like almost the only way to get banned here, is get caught drunk driving - more than once - or do some truly insane speed (and not necessarily being a danger while doing it, i.e. across Death Valley etc.)

People being banned for bumping someone because they drifted out of lane, just never happens, but that kind of shitty driving could very, very easily cause 1 or more fatalities.

There needs to be a change in attitude - starting with the cops - away from the 'no harm, no foul'. Just because nobody died, doesn't mean someone isn't driving like crap. It just means they haven't caused an accident yet. While I don't want to sound all 'Minority Report', there are already laws that exist to prosecute crappy drivers. Just seems like all the cops (and courts - have you been to any local court websites lately?) are interested in is speeding, and making you pay fines for speeding.

Start giving out points for tailgating, poor merging, line-jumping, failing to stay in lane, texting while driving, failure to yield, running lights.


I don't think (sadly) there's any one solution - it needs to see a cultural and attitude change en masse. But start with prosecuting shitty drivers, and publicizing that change in attitude from the cops.

 

[littlebeast]

Sadly, I think you're right.

However, you have to wonder why people in other countries have higher driving standards, yet similar lifestyles and attitudes. What you describe is in common with many Western nations, but the driving in them is different.

Germany is *the* example that disproves the saying, 'You can't legislate behaviour'. That said, it probably took YEARS for having pride in driving, to start to take effect.

But the laws did pull shitty drivers off the road in the meantime, as they do in other countries.

Seems like almost the only way to get banned here, is get caught drunk driving - more than once - or do some truly insane speed (and not necessarily being a danger while doing it, i.e. across Death Valley etc.)

People being banned for bumping someone because they drifted out of lane, just never happens, but that kind of shitty driving could very, very easily cause 1 or more fatalities.

There needs to be a change in attitude - starting with the cops - away from the 'no harm, no foul'. Just because nobody died, doesn't mean someone isn't driving like crap. It just means they haven't caused an accident yet. While I don't want to sound all 'Minority Report', there are already laws that exist to prosecute crappy drivers. Just seems like all the cops (and courts - have you been to any local court websites lately?) are interested in is speeding, and making you pay fines for speeding.

Start giving out points for tailgating, poor merging, line-jumping, failing to stay in lane, texting while driving, failure to yield, running lights.


I don't think (sadly) there's any one solution - it needs to see a cultural and attitude change en masse. But start with prosecuting shitty drivers, and publicizing that change in attitude from the cops.

+1

i'll preface my list by saying i think americans, generally speaking, are pitiful drivers, and their overall skill level is incredibly low. and they don't take driving, or their responsibility when they are on the road seriously.

my list:

- msf required for an M1
- enhance msf to include more training on surviving in heavy traffic - learning to 'read' it (bump up classroom time to accommodate this)
- M1 required for registration
- include more situational awareness in car driver training
- make driver test for car license require higher skill level demonstration
- outfit moto LEO's with proper gear (as a standard, an example, and for their own protection)
- more moto LEO's (besides the obvious maneuverability advantages - cagers can ignore us - but not them)
- do community outreach with moto LEO's (show off their skill - and teach the kids how cool it can be to do the right thing)
- de-emphasize the bullshit elements of vehicle code law enforcement, and concentrate on getting unskilled drivers off the road (make them take an advanced course and charge them up the ass for it - if they can't manage driving, let them take public transport - it's a win-win)
- i'd like to advocate a psych test (too many people do the wrong thing for the wrong reasons) - but that ain't never gonna happen

good question. good luck.

edit - just remembered a story a good friend told me once (and this is not meant to trash immigrants - i hold nothing against them). he was teaching adult english classes at a local JC. the first day of every class, after introductions, he had everyone hold their hands out in front of them and grab an imaginary steering wheel at 10 and 2. then he told them to look over their left shoulder. made them practice this several times, and then said - 'apparently no one else is teaching you this, so you are going to learn it here'.

 

[mookiera]

In other words, 24 of the 27 sportbike deaths that occurred in the Bay Area in 2006 could have been prevented by the rider.

That's roughly 89% rider error.

In other words, you did not read the post that I was quoting.
This is roughly 2008!
The examples that were given were for this year and the statistics
don't add up to 89%. The causes that were given and clear
amounted to approx. 27% driver error. In a couple more, the cause
was not clear and could bring the total up to 44% driver error.
The majority of deaths appear to have been avoidable by the bikers.
I agree that we all have more to learn and we must all be more
vigilant riders.

 

[joespeedfast]

Didn't read all of this yet, but I think all new licensees(M1 or permit) should require 40hrs. dedicated classroom time that is MC specific. I think a double dose of "what's the worst thing that could happen" along with a three stage MSF type parking lot course would prevent most of the "un-necessary" that we all see.

 

[mookiera]

My study of 2006 Bay Area deaths included 71 crashes. However, the 27 sportbike crashes are the only ones I looked at in enough detail to determine cause (it's a time-consuming process, so I focused on the bikes that would be of interest here at BARF).

Of the sportbike crashes, I found that 19 were clearly the fault of the rider. Of the 19, 7 involved improperly licensed riders while 12 riders had valid licenses with an M endorsement.

I also found that in 7 sportbike crashes another driver was either solely (2) or partially responsible (5). Of the 7 riders in those crashes, 4 were improperly licensed.


Those are the conclusions of Harry Hurt's study of 900 crashes in LA County in the 1970s and included crashes of all severities. My study of Bay Area sportbike crashes includes only fatal crashes because those are the ones for which data is available. Maybe because of the severity that resulted in death, these 27 fatal crashes are different than the 900 crashes Hurt studied.

The 19 multiple-vehicle crashes included 11 that were unequivocally caused by the rider:

• 5 head-on where rider crossed centerline and hit oncoming vehicle
• 2 riders who ran red lights and hit crossing vehicle
• 1 stunt gone wrong and hit another motorcycle
• 1 high-speed rear-ender
• 1 rider hit curb, went down, and was then hit by another vehicle
• 1 hit vehicle while passing it when that vehicle turned left

The 5 I classified as mutually at fault were all intersection crashes, and the rider's contribution was excessive speed, as reported by the police who did the investigation. I suspect that Hurt would have put 100% fault on the driver in those cases.

Sorry I did not see this post before my previous post. I would not
have bothered to respond in regards to such cherry picked pretzel logic.
The data you present does not support your conclusions.
Tell Krusty to stop drinking before he whispers in your ear.

 

[Map8]

Rel, I don't know what department you are with but the CHP had a Motorcycle Safety Summit earlier this year. They produced this "compendium of ideas". I don't agree with some of the ideas presented but it might be useful.

Link downloads or opens a PDF depending on your browser settings.
http://www.chp.ca.gov/programs/pdf/MotorcycleReport2008.pdf

 

[mookiera]

Rel, I don't know what department you are with but the CHP had a Motorcycle Safety Summit earlier this year. They produced this "compendium of ideas". I don't agree with some of the ideas presented but it might be useful.

Link downloads or opens a PDF depending on your browser settings.
http://www.chp.ca.gov/programs/pdf/MotorcycleReport2008.pdf

The report is prefaced by this statement,
"Disclaimer: The CHP does not endorse the recommendations contained in this document but is presenting them as they were presented at the summit."

Some of the ideas are good. Some are not. Many of them seem to single
out motorcyclists for special scrutiny, special restrictions and specially enhanced punishments.
Overall, I think we have more to fear from the people and group think
of this Summit than we do from drivers. I hope that not much of it
will ever become policy or law.
Yes, it appears that they want all motorcyclists to be much better
riders than the average driver. While that would definitely be great,
I don't see that it is appropriate to legislate that drivers receive less
training and lesser penalties than riders.
It also appears that they are not in favor of lane sharing and would
approve of restricting or eliminating its legality.

 

[Bubonicplague]

Based on the San Jose sample, the answer is obvious.
1) Obey the Law
2) Don't mix alcohol with riding
3) If you're middle aged buy a sportbike
4) If you're in your 20's buy a cruiser
5) Do more to educate automobile drivers about safety and awareness with regards to motorcycles.

 

[license2ill]

If you wanna look at eliminating crashes as a solution to fatalities, then you will always be one-upped along that line of thought by the non-riding community, that would rather eliminate riding all together as the answer.

If fatalities are the issue, they are caused directly by injuries. Reducing the extent of injuries, and reducing the number of injuries relates directly to the fatality. Not every crash or misstep needs to equate directly to a fatality.

 

[jbt56]

Based on the San Jose sample, the answer is obvious.
1) Obey the Law
2) Don't mix alcohol with riding
3) If you're middle aged buy a sportbike
4) If you're in your 20's buy a cruiser
5) Do more to educate automobile drivers about safety and awareness with regards to motorcycles.

So far, the most sensible, in my opinion.

Remember, too, this being America, the Land of the Lawsuit, if we make it difficult to obtain a driver license, that would be deemed unconstitutional toward stupid people, and would have to be overturned. We can't discriminate against ANYONE anymore.
European countries, esp Germany, have always had strict licensing laws. It's very expensive and very time-consuming to obtain a license, and VERY easy to lose it, so people take it very seriously. It'd never work, here.

 

[Map8]

The report is prefaced by this statement,
"Disclaimer: The CHP does not endorse the recommendations contained in this document but is presenting them as they were presented at the summit."

Some of the ideas are good. Some are not. Many of them seem to single
out motorcyclists for special scrutiny, special restrictions and specially enhanced punishments.
Overall, I think we have more to fear from the people and group think
of this Summit than we do from drivers. I hope that not much of it
will ever become policy or law.
Yes, it appears that they want all motorcyclists to be much better
riders than the average driver. While that would definitely be great,
I don't see that it is appropriate to legislate that drivers receive less
training and lesser penalties than riders.
It also appears that they are not in favor of lane sharing and would
approve of restricting or eliminating its legality.

Excellent points all. The report, and some of the posts in this thread, encourage laws that would apply to motorcycles but not cars which is another step to making motorcyclists second class citizens.

I just posted the report because it seemed odd that Rel's agency would ask him for answers when the state had just hosted this summit. It seemed like duplication of effort and neither approach would have any real effect on fatalities.

 

[Wheelgarage]

To reiterate, everyone has a good point. I have been bike-less for a year now and I relegated myself as a lurker. I refrained from posting a response since this post started (I only like the important ones now, except for the NSFW ones).

As mentioned, it as been a year since I slinged my leg over a bike. It has been a year with no racing or any track days. It has been THREE years since I have riden on the street. I just moved to the valley from the peninsula and re-considered getting back on.

My old commute was 101 and 280. My new commute is 580 / 680. Everyday, I fear for all the motorcyclists out there. At the same time, I envy them for riding.

My assessment for the past two weeks is as follows;
1. The lack of a commuter lane on both highways
2. Most of 580/680 road surface is horrible
3. There are many turns and elevations
4. There are many construction sites
5. There are many bad drivers
6. Motorcycles consistantly split lanes
7. There are many people still on the mobile phones (talking, texting, etc.)
8. There are too many people on the road

Back to the subject....

What is it going to take, and what can be done to lower the number of deaths of motorcycle riders?

I put my track mind-set on, placing my moves on the environment and conditions. I am taking the Corser view of the situation....We should push for a better environment (the road). First and foremost, I would push for TRUE network of commute lanes, especially on 580/680 route. This method would segregate a large percentage of commuting motorcyclist during commute hours, making it a "safer" environment.

 

[masameet]

Rel, I don't know what department you are with but the CHP had a Motorcycle Safety Summit earlier this year. They produced this "compendium of ideas". I don't agree with some of the ideas presented but it might be useful.

Link downloads or opens a PDF depending on your browser settings.
http://www.chp.ca.gov/programs/pdf/MotorcycleReport2008.pdf

Did't JPM attend this? I seem to recall he mentioned it. Rel, you have a BARF source and he's a fellow LEO.

 

[DataDan]

Sorry I did not see this post before my previous post. I would not have bothered to respond in regards to such cherry picked pretzel logic. The data you present does not support your conclusions. Tell Krusty to stop drinking before he whispers in your ear.

Do you have an objection you can express in English? If so please post it, and I'll respond. If not, STFU.

 

[nweaver]

What about putting together a video that is handed to all new bike owners promoting safety, testimonials from riders and family members of fallen riders, and basic equipment issues. Can't force people to watch it, but if it helps one rider, wouldnt that be the payoff?

I think for this, a good "You Should Fix It" ticket on a post-it note. You can take a big stack of "these are all your equipment violations" checked and slap em on the tank, with a URL on the bottom for safety issues, as a way of raising awareness.

Then go up to 4-corners, the parking lot at races, and similar cases and just walk past all the bikes, putting one on each bike (with the sections checked) for bikes with equipment violations, and a different one (with just the safety info) for bikes which don't have equipment violations.

 

[OldFatGuy]

I think for this, a good "You Should Fix It" ticket on a post-it note. You can take a big stack of "these are all your equipment violations" checked and slap em on the tank, with a URL on the bottom for safety issues, as a way of raising awareness.

Then go up to 4-corners, the parking lot at races, and similar cases and just walk past all the bikes, putting one on each bike (with the sections checked) for bikes with equipment violations, and a different one (with just the safety info) for bikes which don't have equipment violations.

I think this would lead to a whole bunch of little yellow pieces of paper on the ground and a lot of people saying "FTP". Just my opinion.

 

[Rel]

We know, for the most part, that warnings don't work.