just had a near-miss

[Sir Humpsalot]

Which is why, as a motorcyclist, I HATES those stupid #$*&! "spinner" rims.

As a motorcyclist, I actually appreciate the spinner rims. It alerts me to the presence of a ********* before they even make a move. Without them, we'd have to wait until the driver actually does something stupid to realize they're a *********. :cross:

 

[DeathBrewer]

well, my insurance says that i am not at fault but we'll see if he disputes it.

and i said my the nose of my car was in the intersection...there was an island between us and i may have been only a little past it.

i was actually planning on making the turn until i saw him. i don't turn into the intersection until i know i'm making a turn. i got a few feet with a pump of the gas and then i saw him.

u-turns are legal in california and this intersection specifically, it is perfectly legal. the cop even told me to make a u-turn to park

he WAS going too fast. looking at the rest of the traffic behind him, he left everyone in the dust. almost all my friends right motorcycles. i don't have a bike myself (cuz i know stuff like this happens every day to my friends and i really am already too messed up to risk it) but i'm not ignorant to how they're handled.

he made a bad move. he was already going too fast and he slammed his brakes. if he would have slowed down, he probably could have even made a turn or simply avoided me. he paniced.

i should hear from my insurance tomorrow. hopefully there were no issues.

and yes, i should have talked more with the cops or at least got their names. he didn't get their information either and he was really cool about the whole thing, which tells me he knew he messed up (and was glad to be alive.)

i'll keep y'all posted.

(gremlins, lol, great imagery)

 

[Gnome]

If you hadn't been there, preparing to turn into his path, at that time would he have fallen down? " for every action there is an equal opposite reaction" Quote.

 

[shafferpilot]

A good lesson for all bike riders. There's a couple riding courses put on by the motorcycle safety foundation that are worth a look. Ohio subsidizes the courses so it's really cheap here, around $40. Experienced riders should check it out too. I go every other year, myself. The riding portion is just fun (when was the last time you rode an old 125 dirtbike?), but the classroom portion just plain saves lives. It centers around anticipating problems and being prepared to react properly. The right thing to do in this case would have been for the guy to slow down as soon as he saw you in the turn lane. Then when you started to pull out, he should have used maximum controllable braking, but stayed in a straight line. Then if you were continuing into the intersection, he should have released the brakes completely and swerved behind your car. If you stopped, he should have released the brakes completely and swerved in front of your car. In a panic it's easy to try and do everything at once, like braking hard AND trying to swerve at the same time.... That's gonna result in a high side wreck everytime.... like it did in this case. Anyways, all you riders out there should check it out:

http://www.msf-usa.org/

 

[Bedlam]

I agree with the MSF courses wholeheartedly. I did the ERC course last summer and just had a blast. Good times...

Been wanting to do some track courses, too, hopefully in the near future.

 

[jdoiv]

As a former rider (sold my bike this spring, first time with out a bike in 14 years), I too can see both sides of this. As someone pointed out earlier, selective memory or vision is a very common thing for drivers. They aren't used to looking for motorcyclists and they will see right through one.

Not to say that this happened here, but as a motorcyclist you have to be aware of the fact that drivers just won't see you until it is much too late. Also, since there wasn't contact, I think this comes down to the cyclist not being in complete control of his motorcycle or surroundings and should share part of the blame.

Instead of slamming on the brakes, he should have swerved and stepped on the gas. I'm surprised that the police who weren't present didn't bother to write a report. I would have asked for one if I were either the rider or the driver. Not sure what the laws in California are on this, though I did my fair share of dodging drivers when I lived in LA.

For any riders out there, I have found that riding in urban areas that keeping a thumb on the horn and index finger on the passing light trigger to be great assets in getting drivers to see you. Flash the brights anytime you see someone looking to pull out into traffic and you'll find that they suddenly "see" you.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

he WAS going too fast. looking at the rest of the traffic behind him, he left everyone in the dust.

My puny 650cc always leaves cars in the dust. If the motorcyclist is paying attention to the light and leaves promptly when the light turns green, the motorcyclist can do a relaxed and leisurely 0-30 in 1.8 seconds. That has a way of leaving cars in the dust... even if you aren't speeding. Most drivers haven't even gotten off the brake pedal yet... So I see that as faulty proof. Motorcycles accelerate so hard that they can easily leave cars in the dust without speeding.

If I stand behind you, call your name, and toss a baseball as you start to turn around, you freak out and think it's coming at you fast. If I stand in front of you and toss the same ball, you see it as a soft lob. We always think things that surprise us are coming faster than they really are.

I mean, there are douches who ride too fast... but every motorcyclist, regardless of whether they ride too fast, accepts that we will always be at fault... because we are the ones riding the dangerous and fast vehicle. Most experienced riders ALWAYS view themselves as being at fault... because we know that people in cars aren't going to be safe enough... so we take it upon ourselves to be safer than the guy in a car at all times. In that endeavor, this rider failed. He no doubt takes that as a cut against his riding prowess because he knows he should have been better able to predict, and cope with another driver's negligent actions while he rides.

 

[z987k]

My puny 650cc always leaves cars in the dust. If the motorcyclist is paying attention to the light and leaves promptly when the light turns green, the motorcyclist can do a relaxed and leisurely 0-30 in 1.8 seconds. That has a way of leaving cars in the dust... even if you aren't speeding. Most drivers haven't even gotten off the brake pedal yet... So I see that as faulty proof. Motorcycles accelerate so hard that they can easily leave cars in the dust without speeding.

If I stand behind you, call your name, and toss a baseball as you start to turn around, you freak out and think it's coming at you fast. If I stand in front of you and toss the same ball, you see it as a soft lob. We always think things that surprise us are coming faster than they really are.

That's true to. when I'm feeling like doing some spirited driving, without breaking any laws I can just do my 0-whatever the speed limit is real quick, which in turn will leave every car in the dust and even put me by myself.

 

[DeathBrewer]

yes, but there were plenty of cars behind him and they weren't travelling near as fast. these are long blocks between lights and i can guarantee that the other cars were going over 35...that's how people drive there. so with that in mind he was well over the speed limit. he also was pretty far away when we saw each other. bikes can stop faster than cars too...but he wasn't able to slow down enough to even see what i was doing. he panicked.

and no, gnome, he wouldn't have fallen down if i wouldn't have been there. but if he would have had complete control of his vehicle and the time to make a decision, he would have been able to see that i was not going to enter the lane until he had passed.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

Sorry for going on and on. This just happens to be a topic that's important to me. I hear a lot of the same excuses thrown around, some valid, some not. Since it's a topic that means a lot to me I at least like to point out the things that flat out don't make sense, the opinions that come from ignorance. It's like when you encounter a person who says homebrew makes you blind. At that point, you have a choice... do you educate or do you walk away? If you want to educate, you try to stay civil, be respectful. I'm trying to do that here and thankfully, I like you DB, so it's not hard at all to do. I hope we can see eye to eye on most of this stuff...

yes, but there were plenty of cars behind him and they weren't travelling near as fast. these are long blocks between lights and i can guarantee that the other cars were going over 35...that's how people drive there. so with that in mind he was well over the speed limit. he also was pretty far away when we saw each other. bikes can stop faster than cars too...

No, Not really...

On the one hand, per square inch, motorcycle tires are more grippy than car tires, on the other hand, bike tires have a round bottom because they are designed to have traction while leaning, whereas the car tires have a flat bottom. This gives the car tire far greater contact patch with the pavement. Not to mention that they have 4 wheels from which to derive traction versus two.

In addition, most cars have ABS while most bikes don't (some do nowadays and it's getting more common, but still far less than 10%).

In addition, if a car skids, the driver can get off the brakes and reapply them. If a motorcycle skids the front wheel for more than a half of a second or so, the rider will hit the pavement almost every time. In short, the penalty for trying to over-brake is far more severe on a bike than in a car, causing most riders to err on the side of caution...

Here's a source that more or less obfuscates the answer...
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Motorcycle-Safety-Driveability-790/Motorcycle-Stopping-Distance.htm

It was probably true in 1980. And it is probably true that bikes can stop faster than cars today...BUT.

Modern bike brakes are fantastic. But modern car brakes, especially with the advent of antilock braking systems, are fantastic too. So let's qualify the answer.

Take an average rider and an average driver on/in modern machines, the car can probably stop faster. (One thing though is that it depends on the car in question. If the car does not have antilock brakes, this may go the opposite way.)

Take an expert rider and an average driver on/in modern machines, the bike can definitely stop faster.

Take an expert rider and an expert driver on/in modern machines, and the car can probably stop faster....but that would be close, and probably again depend on the car.

Much of the rhetoric about bikes being able to stop faster than cars is, in my opinion, old public relations tactics (to wake people up to the fact that riders need plenty of room) that have taken on a life of their own--repeat something enough times and it becomes "true" in the minds of most people, even though reality may be different. It's still a good idea to tell drivers that bikes can stop faster, in order to get them to not follow so close....

but he wasn't able to slow down enough to even see what i was doing. he panicked.

When a driver panics, he presses the brake pedal too hard and a mild skid ensues... or ABS saves his butt and brings him to a safe stop. When a rider panics, it takes less than a half of a second for that front wheel to lock up, creating a grease spot on the pavement. The next thing that happens is the rider begins to fall to the ground. Motorcycles don't have the 4-wheel safety net. When that front wheel loses traction, it's just about game over. The experts say a rider has about a half of a second in which to save a front wheel skid. From there, the two wheels aren't stable like 4, and the bike starts to fall to one side and there is pretty much no saving it at that point. It's not much of a stretch to say that a skidding front wheel is just about equal to "going down" for most street bike riders.

Imagine how many times you've skidded your car... if each one of those times resulted in some road rash or a trip to the hospital... then, just exactly how hard would you want to get on your brakes in an emergency? That's the balance many street riders face. Sure their bikes are supremely capable, but once you get out of your comfort zone, the stakes climb mighty high and mighty fast.

For car drivers, or for riders with a lot of dirt bike experience, it's a piece of cake to handle a front wheel skid. In fact, in my car, I do it nearly every day. It's a non event. But on the bike? It pretty much dirties up my shorts every time I get close.

 

[Bedlam]

if he would have slowed down, he probably could have even made a turn or simply avoided me. he paniced.

Ohhhh, I see. You were in HIS lane, HIS right-of-way, but it's HIS job to avoid you?

Makes perfect sense to me now...

Methinks if he'd been speeding too badly, the two officers at the scene would have ticketed him.

Bottom line here is that if you hadn't nosed out into his lane and made out like you were going to hit him, he wouldn't have fallen down. As we say in Texas, "Man Up" --take responsibility for your wrongdoing. No matter how insurance shakes out, do a nice thing for the guy, like a gift certificate to a bike shop so he can have a little help replacing some gear. (If he smacked his helmet, he'll need to buy a new one. Helmets are made to take ONE sizable hit, that's it. )

 

[Joker]

Ohhhh, I see. You were in HIS lane, HIS right-of-way, but it's HIS job to avoid you?

Makes perfect sense to me now...

Methinks if he'd been speeding too badly, the two officers at the scene would have ticketed him.

Bottom line here is that if you hadn't nosed out into his lane and made out like you were going to hit him, he wouldn't have fallen down. As we say in Texas, "Man Up" --take responsibility for your wrongdoing. No matter how insurance shakes out, do a nice thing for the guy, like a gift certificate to a bike shop so he can have a little help replacing some gear. (If he smacked his helmet, he'll need to buy a new one. Helmets are made to take ONE sizable hit, that's it. )

Interesting twist you have put on it. He wasn't blocking the lane so the motorcycles right of way was still there. That is like saying if a pedestrain steps off the curb and I swerve to much to avoid him and his something its his fault. (pedestrain not in crosswalk before you use that)

If the rider was speeding (not saying he was) he has some responsibility as well, also if that is all the better he can control his motorcycle perhaps he should not be riding one on the road. Everyday someone will do something you don't plan on them doing if he is going to hit the pavement everytime he is in deep trouble.

 

[SparkyBrew]

This one could be tricky. A lawyer might say you were legally at fault for failure to yield, even if the guy was coming at light speed, or something close. I ride and know bikes are difficult to see at times, and if speeding all bets are off.

 

[Joker]

Another item to note, this is California where motorcycles ride the line on the freeway. So lane sharing is not something new to them.

 

[uglygoat]

As a motorcyclist, I actually appreciate the spinner rims. It alerts me to the presence of a ********* before they even make a move. Without them, we'd have to wait until the driver actually does something stupid to realize they're a *********. :cross:

this post delivers!

 

[DeathBrewer]

Ohhhh, I see. You were in HIS lane, HIS right-of-way, but it's HIS job to avoid you?

Makes perfect sense to me now...

Methinks if he'd been speeding too badly, the two officers at the scene would have ticketed him.

Bottom line here is that if you hadn't nosed out into his lane and made out like you were going to hit him, he wouldn't have fallen down. As we say in Texas, "Man Up" --take responsibility for your wrongdoing. No matter how insurance shakes out, do a nice thing for the guy, like a gift certificate to a bike shop so he can have a little help replacing some gear. (If he smacked his helmet, he'll need to buy a new one. Helmets are made to take ONE sizable hit, that's it. )

dude, i didn't "make out that i was going to hit him." i was making a legal turn and he came up on me outta nowhere. remember also that no one got ticketed. the officer even asked me if i was actually making the turn and accepted "no, i stopped when i saw him."

if he would've been going the speed limit, i could have even made the turn without any consequences. i'm not saying i don't feel bad that it happened, and i'm not saying it's one hundred percent his fault, i'm just saying it was an unnecessary accident.

and i'm not buying him anything. i don't have his personal information and he doesn't have mine. that's how trouble starts...damned if anyone i get into any kind of accident with is getting my phone number. We'll let the insurance companies deal with it.

speaking of which, i'm going to follow up with a call right now.

 

[DeathBrewer]

Another item to note, this is California where motorcycles ride the line on the freeway. So lane sharing is not something new to them.

yeah, you can legally split lanes. This is where you have to be really careful. there's one merging lane (the last one before my exit to go home) where people fly onto the freeway when i'm trying to get off. It's hard enough to see the cars...i'm always concerned there will be a bike there.

there was a guy on the radio once that said everyone should open their doors on them. boy, did he get some sh!t for that!

 

[Fingers]

If he was speeding, that's why you didn't see him. It's likely your field of vision was taking in hazards that are in the 'zone' where a vehicle travelling at the speed limit would reside. Even if you did see him, you would assume that he was travelling at a speed that would take him x amount of time to reach you. You base your decisions on that. So you start to make your turn and realize that this guy is moving at a rate that doesn't fit your mental calculations.

There are two different 'at fault' scenarios here. There's the one where someone is really at fault, and there's the legal at fault. Legally, you're probably both at fault because if either one of you is taken out of the equation, the incident would not have happened. As a former biker myself, I say the rider was at fault. When you go fast, you have to realize that you're not playing by the rules so you can't whine when things go badly.

As many have said here, we get cut off all the time. It got so that I was used to it and didn't even notice many times. I've had friends apologize to me for cutting me off at work when we arrived at the same time. I couldn't recall the incident. It's a fact of riding. You're riding because it's thrilling and a little bit dangerous, so don't complain when you get some negative consequences of your fun.

 

[Bedlam]

Here we go:



That's just how I roll, man.

This is my fav:

 

[DFW_Warrior]

Oh this is going to be fun.....

So lets see, you didn't see the motorcyclist soon enough to avoid making partial entry into HIS lane, but somehow your lighting observation could deduce his current rate of speed and all the other traffic conditions? Yep, I'm sorry but that's a crock.

The bike was in his lane, and you moved into it, period. There is no partially blocked him or anything. Just because it's a bike, you morons think that they only need a little part of the road. He was in the lane, so the entire lane is his.

And I also agree with the others on here that said if he was going at such a high rate of speed that I'm sure the po-po would have given him a ticket for reckless driving, exhibition of acceleration, failure to maintain control, or a host of other citations they could toss at him.

As to the comment about every sportbike speeds, that is another crock of you know what. That is the exact same as me coming on here and saying everyone that homebrew's is a stupid drunk, that is a burden on our society. Not a very accurate statement now is it? The people that say every sprotbike, or every motorcycle speeds are usually the same people that say, "I never saw him coming, until it was too late." Then they try to make themselves feel better by trying to negate the fact that they just caused an accident by pinning it on the other person.

You caused a rider to panic by you not paying attention and pulling into his lane, from a liquor store no less... aka, hopeless drunk. Not funny when the shoe is on the other foot is it? Then to try and make yourself feel better about causing someone to crash, you try to pin it on them. Congrats to you, yet another human on this planet incapable of taking responsibility for their own actions. Welcome to being sub-par.

Whether you are legally in the wrong by the eyes of the insurance companies, who knows. They fight it out and take the cheapest way out to resolve it. now whether you are morally responsible, I think that shouldn't even be a question here. But then again, I've seen more moronic questions asked in the past and I'm sure I'll see them again.

BTW, don't get me started on lane splitting, because I don't honestly feel that is safe, or fair. Why should I get to cut in line just because I'm on two wheels? I've never gotten that, and I won't ever get it in the future either.

Have a great day, and cheers.

 

[NUTT]

I'm a registered lurker and I have an opinion here.

It sounds like the original poster caused an accident & is at fault. All I hear is "speeding motorcyclist" blah blah blah "rider could have stopped/swerved/avoided the accident" blah blah blah. Man up, it is your fault. The police dropped the ball at the scene; you should have been cited for causing the accident. The insurance companies will probably have you cover the repairs on the bike & replacement of any gear. FYI, the helmet/jacket/pants/boots/gloves that are pretty much standard riding gear cost around $800 - $1500.

I ride a motorcycle daily. I was involved in an accident similar to this back in August. I left a light, was riding around the speed limit next to a minivan when some jerk in a VW Jetta decided to take a left across the lane I was driving in. I grabbed a whole lot of front brake and hit the ground doing about 45 mph. Fun stuff, let me tell you.

I also hear a lot of "if's" in this thread. You know what... if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. If I'd have tried to swerve around the car that pulled in front of me I'd have hit it. If you'd have pulled out just a little bit farther, you'd have caused that bike to hit you even if he was trying to slow down. If you'd have pulled out a little bit farther and he was trying to avoid you, he'd have hit you doing 35/45/55 and he'd likely be dead.

It is a good thing you didn't kill a motorcyclist that day.

 

[Rick_R]

but somehow your lighting observation could deduce his current rate of speed and all the other traffic conditions? Yep, I'm sorry but that's a crock.
. . .
if he was going at such a high rate of speed that I'm sure the po-po would have given him a ticket for reckless driving, exhibition of acceleration, failure to maintain control, or a host of other citations they could toss at him.

*laugh*

More impressive than the OP's ability to deduce in a split second the bike's rate of speed and traffic conditions is your ability to do so without having even been there.

Do all riders speed? No. Do some? Heck, yes, and this could have been one of those cases. Not being there, I'll give DeathBrewer the benefit of the doubt, while recognizing and agreeing that all of us should try and keep a better look out for motorcycle riders.

Rick

 

[DFW_Warrior]

*laugh*

More impressive than the OP's ability to deduce in a split second the bike's rate of speed and traffic conditions is your ability to do so without having even been there.

I never said that he wasn't speeding at all. But if he was going as fast as the OP said he was, then the consequences would have been much worse. And this opinion is coming from 23 years of riding experience. You don't walk away from a crash at 40+ MPH with no scrapes, or bruising whatsoever.

This was just one of the comments from one of the other motorcycle boards where this post is getting discussed. "What if the guy caused a Mom carrying two kids in a mini-van to crash?" Would you all come running to his defense like you are now? Me thinks not. But somehow, riding a motorcycle makes it ok that this guy crashed due to the negligence of someone not paying attention behind the wheel.

Bottom line, the guy entered the motorcyclists lane, caused him to panic, and thus causing him to crash. Could the rider done things differently, I'm sure he could have. But should he have to avoid vehicles pulling out in front of him simply because he is on two wheels instead of four, hell no. He should be given the same respect as anyone else on the road.

 

[Rick_R]

But somehow, riding a motorcycle makes it ok that this guy crashed due to the negligence of someone not paying attention behind the wheel.

I'm willing to accept the OP's statement that the cycle was speeding where -- for some odd reason -- you don't seem to do so. Assume for a second the motorcycle rider was speeding and, for the sake of argument, significantly speeding. Does that make a difference in your mind? If not, then no more discussion is useful because it does make a difference in my mind, whether the oncoming traffic is a cycle or a car.

Rick

 

[DFW_Warrior]

I'm willing to accept the OP's statement that the cycle was speeding where -- for some odd reason -- you don't seem to do so. Assume for a second the motorcycle rider was speeding and, for the sake of argument, significantly speeding. Does that make a difference in your mind? If not, then no more discussion is useful because it does make a difference in my mind, whether the oncoming traffic is a cycle or a car.

Rick

Yes it does make a difference in my mind. But we are only hearing one side of the story (from a guy leaving a liquor store no less), and I've heard all these comments before. "Man, that guy was flying!", "All motorcycles do is wheelie, and speed", "we should open car doors as they pass", and so forth. Plain and simple, the guy traveling straight, in his lane, had right of way. Are you disputing this fact? If so, then you're a moron and go back to drinking your alcohol. The OP encroached into a lane where he did NOT have right of way. Are you going to dispute this fact as well? I certainly hope not since he admitted to it.

I'm not disputing that the rider may have been speeding. But I highly doubt from my years of riding experience that if the rider had been going at the rate of speed the poster said he was, then there would have been quite a few more injuries. Again, this is just from a couple hundred thousand miles and 23 years of riding.

I honestly think we have a little bit of a fish story here, so some guy can make himself feel better about making a motorcyclist crash.

So let me ask you a question now, in all your years of riding motorcycles, how fast do you think someone has to be going when they fall and not sustain any injuries at all? I'd really like to know this.

Go ahead, wow me with your years of riding experience and prove me wrong.

 

[bradsul]

IB4TL!6789

 

[DeathBrewer]

Yes it does make a difference in my mind. But we are only hearing one side of the story (from a guy leaving a liquor store no less), and I've heard all these comments before. "Man, that guy was flying!", "All motorcycles do is wheelie, and speed", "we should open car doors as they pass", and so forth. Plain and simple, the guy traveling straight, in his lane, had right of way. Are you disputing this fact? If so, then you're a moron and go back to drinking your alcohol. The OP encroached into a lane where he did NOT have right of way. Are you going to dispute this fact as well? I certainly hope not since he admitted to it.

I'm not disputing that the rider may have been speeding. But I highly doubt from my years of riding experience that if the rider had been going at the rate of speed the poster said he was, then there would have been quite a few more injuries. Again, this is just from a couple hundred thousand miles and 23 years of riding.

I honestly think we have a little bit of a fish story here, so some guy can make himself feel better about making a motorcyclist crash.

So let me ask you a question now, in all your years of riding motorcycles, how fast do you think someone has to be going when they fall and not sustain any injuries at all? I'd really like to know this.

Go ahead, wow me with your years of riding experience and prove me wrong.

heh. alright.

FYI: dude swerved back and forth for some time, almost caught himself, lost control and crashed. i think he was rather lucky he didn't get hurt worse.

yes, you only have one side of the opinion. but i never said that motorcyclists all drive like maniacs. i never said that I think people should open their doors on them. i feel quite the opposite. my roommate rides a motorcycle and has had a few crashes. i have a friend that died last year in a motorcycle accident. i don't ride one because i don't like the idea of messing myself up (i hurt my back last year, and am still suffering from it.) that doesn't mean that i think people can't or shouldn't ride motorcycles and it sure as hell doesn't mean i'm not careful and considerate to bikers. if anything, the past has made me more courteous. believe me, the last thing i want is to even SEE is someone crash their bike.

i also didn't say he was going 60 MPH. i simply stated the fact that he was going significantly faster than the other traffic and he was definitely going over the speed limit.

and the purpose of this thread was not to make anyone feel better. it was to state an incident that scared the crap out of me and to see people's opinions on who would be at fault LEGALLY in the incident.

and i was actually going TO the liquor store and i hadn't been drinking, so what kind of a comment is that and what difference does it make? pretty stupid to base your opinion on that, especially on a homebrew forum.

should've known this would escalate and someone would decide to be an ass. sorry, everyone.

 

[olllllo]

DFW_Warrior

Not the best use of your first 3 posts. Cool it.

 

[Rick_R]

Yes it does make a difference in my mind.

You can't tell it.

But we are only hearing one side of the story

True. Why you assume the OP's lying, I've no idea. But true.

I've heard all these comments before. "Man, that guy was flying!", "All motorcycles do is wheelie, and speed", "we should open car doors as they pass", and so forth.

Good for you. Does this excuse a cyclist riding like an idiot? No.

Plain and simple, the guy traveling straight, in his lane, had right of way. Are you disputing this fact?

You and I agree it makes a difference if he's speeding; what's to dispute?

Again, this is just from a couple hundred thousand miles and 23 years of riding.

Congratulations; I'm most impressed that it gives you psychic abilities.

Go ahead, wow me with your years of riding experience and prove me wrong.

Only rode for about eight years and that was better than twenty years ago. In my experience from then and to now, though, nothing has changed; some folks who ride motorcycles are idiots. Some of them speed, some of the pop wheelies, some pass on the median, some decide the speed limit is a suggestion. Not all are idiots, certainly most are not -- but some are. This could be such a case.

If so, then you're a moron and go back to drinking your alcohol.

Ah. Dealing with a child. That ends the discussion.

Rick

 

[Rick_R]

You know, I hadn't noticed DFW_Warrior was a new member and just realized he heard about this thread on some other board and came here for the express purpose of this argument. He is upset that folks might have preconceptions about motorcycle riders, so comes and joins the homebrewtalk forums to fight those preconceptions. In the process he tells me I need to "go back to drinking [my] alcohol" and wonders what it suggests that the OP was leaving a liquor store.

Ironic, isn't it.

Rick