gnurob
Member
Needless to say, driving a car is much safer than a motorcycle. Crumple zones, air bags, safety belts, and that all-encompassing steel frame—that most cyclists loathingly refer to as the “cage”—are all designed to minimize injuries to passengers. Motorcycles have none of these features.
There are helmets, gloves, boots, and now an increasingly diverse range of apparel, which can help in some circumstances, but none of this can replace a car. Motorcycles are less safe than cars.
So, why do we ride motorcycles if they are less safe than cars? Perhaps Robert Pirsig said it best in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: “You’re completely in contact with it all. You’re in the scene, not just watching it anymore, and the sense of presence is overwhelming.” For some riders, all these layers of products come between the rider, and their contact with their surroundings.
They may have thoughtfully considered their safety options, which includes their riding style, skill level, and riding intentions on that day, and decided less was more. Did they choose the right assortment of safety features? …and who decides what arbitrary level of safety equipment is sufficient? Perhaps it should be the minimums of the HTA? …or the complete Klim collection? I don’t think other riders should be so quick to judge them. Especially if they’re not wearing hi-vis everything, since they have already drawn their own arbitrary line as to what counts as enough.
Personally, I have three helmets, two pairs of gloves, two pairs of boots, two suits, and an armoured jersey to choose from. But, tonight, I’m going to enjoy this beautiful weather with a piss pot and a t-shirt.
Let’s be less divisive to other riders, and enjoy the road and people we meet, before we start telling people they should be driving cars. Cheers.
There are helmets, gloves, boots, and now an increasingly diverse range of apparel, which can help in some circumstances, but none of this can replace a car. Motorcycles are less safe than cars.
So, why do we ride motorcycles if they are less safe than cars? Perhaps Robert Pirsig said it best in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: “You’re completely in contact with it all. You’re in the scene, not just watching it anymore, and the sense of presence is overwhelming.” For some riders, all these layers of products come between the rider, and their contact with their surroundings.
They may have thoughtfully considered their safety options, which includes their riding style, skill level, and riding intentions on that day, and decided less was more. Did they choose the right assortment of safety features? …and who decides what arbitrary level of safety equipment is sufficient? Perhaps it should be the minimums of the HTA? …or the complete Klim collection? I don’t think other riders should be so quick to judge them. Especially if they’re not wearing hi-vis everything, since they have already drawn their own arbitrary line as to what counts as enough.
Personally, I have three helmets, two pairs of gloves, two pairs of boots, two suits, and an armoured jersey to choose from. But, tonight, I’m going to enjoy this beautiful weather with a piss pot and a t-shirt.
Let’s be less divisive to other riders, and enjoy the road and people we meet, before we start telling people they should be driving cars. Cheers.
