Letter in Times
Discussion
Not a biker but a cager so be gentle with me, but not the letter writer.
Thought you ought to be aware of this letter in Today's Thunderer
Got to it boys and girls! Sort him out!
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,172-1596323,00.html
Letters to the Editor
May 04, 2005
Motorcycle dangers
From Mr Paul Smith
Sir, I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of motorcycle deaths. These accidents, whether the fault of the motorcyclist or other road users or even road conditions, are tragedies for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of protection a motorcyclist has.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the use of motorcycles to, say, minor roads, or even banning them altogether?
Yours faithfully,
PAUL SMITH,
8 Beacon Hill Road, Halifax HX3 6AF.
ps014x2383@blueyonder.co.uk
April 30.
>>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 4th May 10:53
Thought you ought to be aware of this letter in Today's Thunderer
Got to it boys and girls! Sort him out!
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,172-1596323,00.html
Letters to the Editor
May 04, 2005
Motorcycle dangers
From Mr Paul Smith
Sir, I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of motorcycle deaths. These accidents, whether the fault of the motorcyclist or other road users or even road conditions, are tragedies for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of protection a motorcyclist has.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the use of motorcycles to, say, minor roads, or even banning them altogether?
Yours faithfully,
PAUL SMITH,
8 Beacon Hill Road, Halifax HX3 6AF.
ps014x2383@blueyonder.co.uk
April 30.
>>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 4th May 10:53
What kind of even-handed appraisal is this? Assuming his statement regarding the “rising number of motorcycle deaths” is true, even the most coarse understanding of statistics tells us that this may be because the number of motorcyclists is increasing. And where is the analysis underpinning the otherwise wild and uninformed assertion that “we should start looking at restricting the use of motorcycles to, say, minor roads, or even banning them altogether”?
While it is hard to deny that motorcyclists are exposed to greater risks, in a free society it remains the preserve of all individuals to live their lives as they see fit (albeit in a lawful manner, of course). If some choose to take greater risks than others, whatever the reason, then so be it. I, for one, do not wish to be wrapped in cotton wool by an ignorant stranger.
Where does this approach to risk-aversion end? If the likes of Mr Smith hold sway in this country, we will soon be banning barbecues, for example, because the smoke is carcinogenic.
I’m struggling to think why The Times published this letter unless it made a connection between the tenor of the piece and the perceived mood of the public.
While it is hard to deny that motorcyclists are exposed to greater risks, in a free society it remains the preserve of all individuals to live their lives as they see fit (albeit in a lawful manner, of course). If some choose to take greater risks than others, whatever the reason, then so be it. I, for one, do not wish to be wrapped in cotton wool by an ignorant stranger.
Where does this approach to risk-aversion end? If the likes of Mr Smith hold sway in this country, we will soon be banning barbecues, for example, because the smoke is carcinogenic.
I’m struggling to think why The Times published this letter unless it made a connection between the tenor of the piece and the perceived mood of the public.
s014x2383@blueyonder.co.uk">ps014x2383@blueyonder.co.uk</a> It is very important that as many people as possible respond to this letter. "Powers that be" read papers and indifference or support could lead to some silly reaction that infringes our right to ride.
Be sensible and polite but use some or all of the following, and anything else that you can think of:
1. Personal liberty
2. Nanny state
3. Should consider the cause of accident not the consequence - most bike accidents are caused by cars
4. Training is a better answer
etc
Please write in response, and encourage as many people as possible to do likewise.
If anyone has connections with a bike mag - give it to them also. Create a fuss here as silence may lead to regret!
Be sensible and polite but use some or all of the following, and anything else that you can think of:
1. Personal liberty
2. Nanny state
3. Should consider the cause of accident not the consequence - most bike accidents are caused by cars
4. Training is a better answer
etc
Please write in response, and encourage as many people as possible to do likewise.
If anyone has connections with a bike mag - give it to them also. Create a fuss here as silence may lead to regret!
Sir,
I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of total cocks writing whinging letters to the media on subjects about which they know nothing.
These letters, whether the fault of the media or education or even society in general, are annoying for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of intelligence displayed by the morons that write such drivel.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the use of pens, pencils and word processing software or simply driving some sense into these cretins with a lump hammer?
Yours faithfully,
A. Cager. (with a full bike license
)
I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of total cocks writing whinging letters to the media on subjects about which they know nothing.
These letters, whether the fault of the media or education or even society in general, are annoying for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of intelligence displayed by the morons that write such drivel.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the use of pens, pencils and word processing software or simply driving some sense into these cretins with a lump hammer?
Yours faithfully,
A. Cager. (with a full bike license
)To the ignorant,
Car owners/passengers involved in KSI's are also on the increase according to the statistics. Shall we restrict their use to minor roads or ban them completely?
I'm sure relatives whom have suffered a loss of a car or motorcycle user do not differentiate the method of which their loved one was killed. To finish, should one assume that we should ultimately ban all that may harm an individual?
Regards,
CJP
>> Edited by veetwin on Thursday 5th May 07:51
Car owners/passengers involved in KSI's are also on the increase according to the statistics. Shall we restrict their use to minor roads or ban them completely?
I'm sure relatives whom have suffered a loss of a car or motorcycle user do not differentiate the method of which their loved one was killed. To finish, should one assume that we should ultimately ban all that may harm an individual?
Regards,
CJP
>> Edited by veetwin on Thursday 5th May 07:51
Also saw this in my other bike forum http://p196.ezboard.com/ffazerownersfrm1.showMessage?topicID=28745.topic
Seems to me, it's either a wind up or just some old fuddy duddy who has no idea about the REAL problem and need to get his facts straight.
Seems to me, it's either a wind up or just some old fuddy duddy who has no idea about the REAL problem and need to get his facts straight.
I trust this is not Safespeed on a wind-up. 
Slightly more seriously...
Sir, I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of deaths of people who have been born. These events, whether the fault of the person themselves or other people or even unexpected natural occurances, are tragedies for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of protection a person that has been born has.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the being born to, say, minor species, or even banning it altogether?
PS: Luckily for me I survived yesterday, and have high hopes of getting to the end of my second one too!
More seriously still...
I'm with Itchy. It seems that the powers that be cannot get it through their thick skulls that all road accidents are caused by a lack of observation, a lapse in judgement or a disregard of other road users. Simply sticking up more and more bits of street tat in the form of cameras and signs only serves to make accurate observation harder because we have to look at signs stating the bleeding obvious or, more and more frequently - especially on motorways and dual-carriageways, containing so much text in a small font that the only way you could be expected to digest it is if you stopped totally. This overload only serves to increase the risk of a misjudgement and does nothing about those who disregard others.
The fact that the number of Trafpol are constantly declining serves only to exacerbate the problems caused by those in the third category.
Slightly more seriously...
Sir, I am becoming increasingly alarmed at the rising number of deaths of people who have been born. These events, whether the fault of the person themselves or other people or even unexpected natural occurances, are tragedies for a great many people. The main problem seems to me to be the lack of protection a person that has been born has.
I wonder whether we should start looking at restricting the being born to, say, minor species, or even banning it altogether?
PS: Luckily for me I survived yesterday, and have high hopes of getting to the end of my second one too!
More seriously still...
I'm with Itchy. It seems that the powers that be cannot get it through their thick skulls that all road accidents are caused by a lack of observation, a lapse in judgement or a disregard of other road users. Simply sticking up more and more bits of street tat in the form of cameras and signs only serves to make accurate observation harder because we have to look at signs stating the bleeding obvious or, more and more frequently - especially on motorways and dual-carriageways, containing so much text in a small font that the only way you could be expected to digest it is if you stopped totally. This overload only serves to increase the risk of a misjudgement and does nothing about those who disregard others.
The fact that the number of Trafpol are constantly declining serves only to exacerbate the problems caused by those in the third category.
I've e-mailed the guy
Dear Mr Smith
I read your article in the paper and whilst I have no wish to rubbish your statement, I must take issue with you.
At 50 years of age, I am now a committed ‘biker’ of two years. I was taught to ride defensively by an excellent school for motorcyclists and have ridden about 10,000 miles in just under two years.
I also drive a car and have done so since 1973 but, with the traffic on the roads these days and the government’s intentions to almost rid every motorist of their driving licence, the fun has gone out of driving a car.
On a motorcycle, the fun in travelling on these congested roads has now returned and you don’t have to be riding fast or dangerously to enjoy the experience. You do though have to be fully aware that you are more ‘at risk’ than being the driver of a car.
To follow your arguement through, why not ban cyclists, pedestrians – all of who are at the risk of being hit by cars, or maybe even ban cars because the drivers should be more aware of what’s happening around them rather than chatting, using the phone, smoking a cigarette or eating something.
I love motorcycling. I enjoy the freedom of riding a motorcycle and the fact that you meet so many people and share a passion with them, many of whom you wouldn’t dream of talking to if you walked past them.
If you haven’t tried it, you really should and, if you did, I’m sure that you’d be more sympathetic to the motorcycling fraternity rather than seeking to banish us from the major roads, or maybe altogether.
You have, I think, offended and incensed a great many bikers and I’m sure that this was not your intent.
p.s. You tw*t!
Dear Mr Smith
I read your article in the paper and whilst I have no wish to rubbish your statement, I must take issue with you.
At 50 years of age, I am now a committed ‘biker’ of two years. I was taught to ride defensively by an excellent school for motorcyclists and have ridden about 10,000 miles in just under two years.
I also drive a car and have done so since 1973 but, with the traffic on the roads these days and the government’s intentions to almost rid every motorist of their driving licence, the fun has gone out of driving a car.
On a motorcycle, the fun in travelling on these congested roads has now returned and you don’t have to be riding fast or dangerously to enjoy the experience. You do though have to be fully aware that you are more ‘at risk’ than being the driver of a car.
To follow your arguement through, why not ban cyclists, pedestrians – all of who are at the risk of being hit by cars, or maybe even ban cars because the drivers should be more aware of what’s happening around them rather than chatting, using the phone, smoking a cigarette or eating something.
I love motorcycling. I enjoy the freedom of riding a motorcycle and the fact that you meet so many people and share a passion with them, many of whom you wouldn’t dream of talking to if you walked past them.
If you haven’t tried it, you really should and, if you did, I’m sure that you’d be more sympathetic to the motorcycling fraternity rather than seeking to banish us from the major roads, or maybe altogether.
You have, I think, offended and incensed a great many bikers and I’m sure that this was not your intent.
p.s. You tw*t!
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff