This is the first time I've heard of this ever happening...

NEW WINDSOR - A Beacon man was killed yesterday evening when he crashed his motorcycle in the parking lot of the store he had just bought it from.

Police said Dennis Walden, 56, was riding the 2008 Harley-Davidson he had just bought from Jim Moroney's Cycle Shop across the store's parking lot around 6 p.m. when he lost control and hit a parked vehicle. Walden, who police said was not wearing a helmet, was taken to St. Luke's Cornwall Hospital in Newburgh, where he was pronounced dead.

Labels: Motorcycle Deaths

There's been a lot of skepticism and complaints about the new "fly-by-wire" throttle on the 2008 Harley-Davidson touring models. Well last week, it may have claimed a victim.

Here's a post I found on HDForums today...

My Brother HAMMER was killed today in a bike accident -- He was the President and Chapter Holder for Boozerfighters Chapter 39 in Granburys, Texas. He is also the Owner of Jackhammer Tattoo. his wife Sindi is in serious condition.

Seems that the new electronic throttle on the 08 H.D.'s has a problem they accelerate on their own and you can't shut them down. he had just got his bike back from H.D. for this problem and they told him it was fixed. this time he was in a curve and couldn't pull out of it , ran off the road and threw Sindi off ,then the bike flipped over on him and broke his neck .

Labels: Harley-Davidson, Motorcycle Deaths

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released some new figures that pinpoint SuperSport motorcycles as causing the lion's share of motorcycle fatalities.

Here's a link to an article on USA Today...
http://www.usatoday.com/..../ 2007-09-10-Deadlybikes_N.htm

Here are some stats...

Number of deaths for every 10,000 registered motorcycles in 2005, by type of bike:

Cruiser: 5.7
Touring: 6.5
Sport: 10.7
Supersport: 22.5

Of course, I'm never the one to read this stuff at face value. I have to read between the lines and look for a rat somewhere.

I think we all understand that it's not the bike that kills the rider, it's either the rider, or some other driver. It's like saying that guns are responsible for killing people, when in fact, people kill people.

So, why would the IIHS want to pick on SuperSport motorcycles? It gives them justification raising insurance premiums. They want to raise premiums, so they publish statistics like this to explain why they're doing it.

But there's a bigger issue here.

If someone does something stupid while riding a motorcycle, and gets himself killed, why is that concern for us? Why do people feel as if that person had to be protected from himself? Why can't we let idiots get killed?

We were founded as a nation of personal responsibility, not community responsibility. Personal responsibility is what makes it possible to have individual freedom. Community responsibility demands that individual freedom be taken away for the good of the whole. That's what Vietnam & China is.

You decide what's best for our country.

Labels: Motorcycle Deaths, Motorcycle Statistics, SuperSport Motorcycles

Yesterday, Warren Woodward, Chair, State Legislative Committee, of the Street Bikers United Hawaii, posted an article of his to an ABATE discussion forum regarding a June 2006 study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

I was forwarded a copy of this article via e-mail, and reproduced it here.

In summary, the NHTSA pointed out that motorcycle-related deaths have increased sharply from 1997 to 2005, by a rate of 89%.

However, Woodward did some research of his own, using the same NHTSA data, and found that the agency had cherry-picked its data for maximum drama. Had they went further back in years, they'd find that motorcycle-related deaths have actually decreased.

Here's Woodward's article...

Recent Trends in Fatal Motorcycle Crashes: An Update (http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2006/810606.pdf) is 72 pages of charts and analysis from The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) based on the 10 years from 1995 to 2004. It should have been called Fabricating Trends in Fatal Motorcycle Crashes. Here's why:

Cherry Picking

NHTSA is cherry picking data. In the opening summary, motorcycle fatalities are presented as a crisis: "Since 1997 motorcycle rider fatalities have increased 89%." Wow, sounds bad, but over the years I have received many solicitations from investment newsletters. As a result I've learned how easy it is to pick certain time frames to make profits look good. It's called cherry picking and it's what NHTSA is doing here. Go back 15 years, since 1990, and fatalities have only increased 24%. If you go back 25 years, from 1980 to 2004, the fatalities actually decrease 22%. From the graph below of yearly rider fatalities you can see what I mean:


So instead of starting out the report with a horrifying 89% increase in fatalities, NHTSA could have begun by saying that since 1980 motorcycle fatalities have dropped 22%. But then there's no crisis, and we wouldn't need to be saved, or at least not by them.

Helmets

A chart on page 36 of the report shows that the helmet use rate in fatal crashes was basically unchanged over the 10 years, 1995 to 2004. If helmets "save lives", shouldn't more of the dead be helmetless, especially as fatalities rose 89%? Yet helmeted riders consistently comprise the dead majority at around 54% of fatalities every year. Of course that doesn't stop NHTSA from calling for mandatory helmet laws.

Ultimately, the helmet numbers are useless because they do not reflect anything except how many were wearing and how many were not at time of death. NHTSA might as well have a chart showing how many riders were or were not wearing wristwatches. How can anyone tell if a helmet would have helped or not? Just because someone died without a helmet does not mean they would have lived with a helmet. And how many of the helmeted dead had snapped necks or basal skull fracture? NHTSA doesn't say.

A similar trick was played here in Hawaii just recently by the state Department of Transportation. They emphasized that two thirds of the riders who died in Hawaii last year were not wearing helmets. Of course the implication is that had they been wearing helmets they would not be dead. But we don't know that. The fact is that helmets have not changed the death to accident ratio in any state where they have been mandated ( see Helmet Law Facts at www.sbumaui.org ).

I think fatalities went up over the 10 years for the same reason they went down over the 25 years. And if you find that reason be sure and tell me. My point is there is no one reason. All I know is the more experience and training a rider has the better, but even that won't save you when you're time is up.

Vehicle Miles Traveled

Much of the report is simply invalid since it is based on NHTSA's fictitious Vehicle Miles Traveled. In NHTSA's National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety they actually admit: "Unfortunately, vehicle miles of travel (VMT) data for motorcycles are not reported directly and must be estimated." Fabricated would be a more accurate word than estimated ( see addendum 2, Helmet Law Facts, at www.sbumaui.org ). When it comes to VMT, NHTSA is winging it.

Speed & Alcohol

According to NHTSA, over the 10 years, speed related deaths decreased 6% and alcohol related deaths decreased 8%. That's great, but I always question the accuracy of those numbers. For example, we had a rider here on Maui cross the double yellow line while going up Haleakala. Cars coming down the other way are usually doing at least 60. The Maui News said the accident may have been speed related. Sorry, from where I sit it was intelligence related (and he was wearing a helmet).

Engine Displacement

One of the more troubling aspects of the report is NHTSA's fixation on engine displacement. There are 23 different charts, almost 1/3 of the report's total charts, concerning engine displacement and fatalities--engine displacement and speed, engine displacement and type of crash, engine displacement and type of road, there's even one that compares engine displacement with the days people died!

We all know that motorcycle engine displacement has increased over the years and that a 750, for example, is no longer a "big bike". Somehow though, a popular myth is being created, and NHTSA is fueling it, that increased displacement = increased fatality, especially amongst inexperienced riders. Having got into plenty of accidents when I was uneducated and inexperienced on my first bike which displaced 175cc, I have never bought into this myth.

There is so much more to a motorcycle than displacement. Power to weight ratio has a lot more to do with speed. There are plenty of 600cc rockets that can smoke a bagger with more than twice that displacement. Weight, seat height, rider position, center of gravity, tires, braking capability, and rider experience all play a role in how well a machine can be handled. Yet NHTSA has not figured out how to quantify those so they are not part of the mix. And NHTSA will never be able to quantify karma.

Looking long term, I see NHTSA's displacement fixation leading to a push for graduated licensing whereby riders would be prohibited from owning larger displacement bikes until they passed certain exams over a certain number of years. Outrageous? It's already happening in Europe. NHTSA is laying the groundwork now--creating the problem by cherry picking the displacement data--and the solution will be a graduated license system. I'd bet on it.

Blame the Rider

The undercurrent running throughout NHTSA's report is blame the rider. We are either too young, too old, too fast, too drunk, or the motor's too big. Certainly riders do die because of one or a combination of those. However, there are 75 charts in this 72 page report and not one showing rider fatalities caused by the Right Of Way violations of other road users.

NHTSA is as blind as a Right Of Way violator. What's worse is that, as taxpayers, we pay their undeserved salaries.

Labels: Motorcycle Deaths, Research Studies

A cager, who killed a biker in a car accident several years ago, found his way onto a biker forum, and told his story. He apparently feels a heavy load of guilt, and asks these bikers what he can do to express his sorrow to the dead biker's family...

I was 17 and on my way to do volunteer work. I didn't quite know where the building was (except for it being on the left-hand side of the road) and so when it came up on me I just panicked and turned into an oncoming motorcyclist. He flew up onto my windshield and was killed instantly...

I came here to ask you what you would want to hear from someone who's killed a person you loved. I've wanted to write a letter but I also think meeting one-on-one might bring some closure.

Labels: Motorcycle Deaths

This 12 minute video will put an uneasy feeling in your gut.

http://www.livevideo.com/..../requiem-for-a-biker.aspx

I think the producer did a pretty good job of putting it all into perspective. It'll make you think about your next ride.

Labels: Motorcycle Crashes, Motorcycle Deaths

I've come to believe the mainstream media hates motorcycles, and loves to glorify the deaths of motorcyclists.

It seems every biker death gets coverage in the news. I've made a policy on this blog not to report on biker deaths, except when very unusual circumstances surround.

On the one hand, you could argue that news coverage of this sort provides some memorial value because it makes us think and feel sorrow for the rider who died. But on the other hand, the media doesn't report on each and every person who dies in a car crash.

I ran a search on Yahoo News for the word, "motorcycle", and 15 of the 20 headlines were about a motorcycle crash/death.

In California, where helmets are required for all riders, the media always mentions the rider was wearing a helmet. I've yet to hear about a rider in California that died in an accident, who wasn't wearing one. So why does the media always say, "the victim was wearing a helmet"? Because they want people to know that even if you wear a helmet, you're still gonna die.

And I think that's what it is. The media wants to scare people away from riding motorcycles. How often do you see reports that motorcycle deaths are rising? How often do you see reports that more old guys are crashing big V-twin bikes?

I think motorcycles is one of the last great embodiments of freedom. When someone asks a biker why they ride a motorcycle, despite all the dangers, the answer is always the same, "I love the freedom of riding".

This love of freedom is why bikers are always fighting against "big brother" laws, like helmet laws, safety goggle laws, loud pipes laws, and what have you.

Bikers always show their appreciation for our military. They always claim that freedom is not free.

To me, the mainstream media is still the ally of liberals and socialists, it's still the enemy of our military, still the enemy of freedom. You can't control people who are free. I think that's why the media hates motorcycles.

Labels: Mainstream Media, Motorcycle Deaths

Scripps Howard New Service obtained death certificate records of 3,697 people who died in a motorcycle accident to paint a statistical portrait of dead bikers.

Read the full article.

The data came from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta and includes accidents occuring in 2003 up to the current year.

90 percent of them are male.
87 percent of them are white.
46 percent of them are aged 40 and up.
33 percent of them have attended college, compared to 50 percent for the general public.

Scripps Howard also found that 20 percent of cycling fatalities were men who were divorced at the time of their deaths, a rate that is more than double the national average.

The study goes on to suggest that motorcycle deaths may be particularly linked with middle-aged men, going through mid-life crisis, compounded with failing eye-sight.

Interestingly, the study did not take into consideration that cars were involved in many motorcycle accidents, and that it might have been a 40+ year old cager in mid-life crisis with failing eyesight that actually caused a biker to die.

Labels: Motorcycle Deaths, Motorcycle Statistics