Seen horrific things...

Obviously you cant grasp the concept.... Its EXACTLY the same, both will cause you serious harm yet you proceed to do it, just look at the next wino you see sitting in park and go over to him and rant at him about the virtues of his drinking and that his mum would be very very upset and when he ends up in hospital all your wino friends will be feeling bad for him.....

I'm actually starting to think there's something not quite right with you...

What has someone sitting drinking in a park got to do with someone not wearing proper safety equipment when riding a bike? Especially since small amounts of alcohol are proven to be beneficial and consumption of very large quantities is a recognised mental disorder!
 
Hogwash.

Alcohol is beneficial depending on what report you read or what the daily mail says this month, Replace alcohol with smoking if it makes it easier for you.

The point is FREEDOM OF CHOICE it is not down to self righteous forum warriors to decide that wearing full set of leathers should be law and just because they have had a off deem to enforce there madness upon everyone else. There would be less and less bikers, no scooter boys or are you going to tell me coming off at 30mph on a vespa is different to a Harly/R1 etc
 
Last edited:
Hogwash.

Alcohol is beneficial depending on what report you read or what the daily mail says this month, Replace alcohol with smoking if it makes it easier for you.

The point is FREEDOM OF CHOICE it is not down to self righteous forum warriors to decide that wearing full set of leathers should be law and just because they have had a off deem to enforce there madness upon everyone else. There would be less and less bikers, no scooter boys or are you going to tell me coming off at 30mph on a vespa is different to a Harly/R1 etc

But what about the right of others not to be affected by your decision? A 'wino' getting drunk doesn't affect someone else. Smoking is a daft example considering every packet of cigarettes tells you not to smoke, there are add campaigns everywhere that tell you not to smoke.
Your choice not to wear leathers can result in some poor bugger having to scrape you up off the road, massive surgical requirements should you survive and massive costs anyways should you fail. On an episode of traffic cops recently it pointed out the average cost for a road based fatality is £1.5m. If you can take some simple action to avoid that then it seems the logical choice.

You seem to be the type of person who would be at home in the USA waiving a gun about in the air after one of their all too common massacres shouting 'what about my right to bear arms' 'it's ma constitutionalalalal right!' 'having never gawn to church it's ma gawd given right to bear arms!'.
 
I'd disagree there. I'd say defensive riding and good roadcraft and the correct PPE is part of an overall package. Placing yourself in any situation which has the potential to be dangerous is something that can be addressed by putting control measures in place to deal with hazards and reduce risk. In my line of work we have many different examples of components of an overall 'package' to allow us to carry out our duties safely and efficiently. We have Standard Operating Procedures, Instructional Training Notes, Technical Information Notes, Service Policy and Procedures and an Incident Command System to name but a few. Couple all the above up with the correct PPE and equipment for any given situation and we can reduce the potential exposure to the hazards which reduces the likelihood of risk. Apologies if that sounds like a Health & Safety lecture but it is fairly common sense to be honest and can be applied to many areas of life including riding fast bikes on the road.

As I said previously, I'm an advocate of freedom of choice but when exercising that freedom of choice clearly contradicts common sense and exposes an individual to a much higher potential for risk and serious injury it that 'right to wear what I like' becomes farcical.

It would appear that those who advocate this freedom of choice and exercise it when riding will continue to do so. However they may not realise the folly in this until they have an 'off' and remove several centimetres of skin and bone from their person. If that's what it takes to afford these riders the perspective of what massive risks they are potentially undertaking then so be it. Continue riding in shorts, t-shirts and flip flops until that day perhaps arrives. I'll stick with my leathers and textiles though, thanks. :cool:

To play devils advocate here a little though, I'd agree with the point Sagalout made earlier:-



I've seen this happen on a few occasions. And I will admit I've went through this thought process myself many years ago. It's something that is a natural human reaction and can only be expected to a certain degree. Riding in a £2k one piece suit doesn't guarantee you will be perfectly fine in the event of an 'off' and many inexperienced riders would do well to remember this. Unfortunately many do not.

And finally, aside from what I've previously described as my current career which spans over 23 years in the Fire & Rescue Service and the resulting RTC's involving bikes I've attended and dealt with, there's THIS. Still affects me if I'm honest and although he was wearing full riding kit and was killed almost instantly it was the worst day of my life to date. I feel fairly well qualified to comment on the subject of all aspects of biking safety including wearing the correct kit on the roads. Forgive me if I'm fairly vocal on the subject. :cool:

I can completely respect your opinion mate, and understand you've probably got a unique position on it.

I'm kind of playing devils advocate really, as I do wear gear most of the time. My point is that biking, by definition is dangerous. I know a few people who work for A&E and they all think riding a bike is ridiculously stupid, gear or not.

People though have to decide on their own level or risk. If you insist on riding a bike as safely as possibly you would wear hi-viz (proven to prevent accidents) over full leathers (textiles offer little real protection in comparison), have undertaken advanced training (and ride to those standards at all times), ride a bike with ABS and Traction control with additional auxillary lights (also proven to reduce accidents).

So how many of the people on this thread can honestly say they do all of the above? If not why not? It's because you're prepared to accept a personal level of risk. You may decide not to wear hi-viz because it doesn't look very cool, or don't have a bike with ABS because you think you can stop faster or just enjoy a bike without it. I've added auxillary lights recently (because they look good on the bike haha) and its amazing how much more visible the bike seem to be to cars, so why don't more bikes have them? Would you add them to your sports bike, or compromise because it wouldn't look right (ie you're prepared to accept the increased risk of not being seen)

Taken to its extreme you shouldn't really be riding a bike because you could actually just negate the risk completely by taking the car.

So people set their own levels. For every person that thinks riding in a T Shirt is irresponsible and selfish, there are 10 that think riding a bike is irresponsible and selfish (and they are equally correct). So what do you say to them?
 
This has been doing the rounds on facebook... 25mph apparently.

577143_525327597522086_251315891_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Obviously you cant grasp the concept.... Its EXACTLY the same, both will cause you serious harm yet you proceed to do it, just look at the next wino you see sitting in park and go over to him and rant at him about the virtues of his drinking and that his mum would be very very upset and when he ends up in hospital all your wino friends will be feeling bad for him.....

Possibly the most irrelevant analogy ever made. Homeless people don't tend to have much of a choice, they drink to reduce the misery of their existence. Do you ride around without protection because you are so miserable that you want to grind your skin off to make you feel better?
 
So people set their own levels. For every person that thinks riding in a T Shirt is irresponsible and selfish, there are 10 that think riding a bike is irresponsible and selfish (and they are equally correct). So what do you say to them?

I explain the significant benefits of riding a bike vs a car, and how I take steps to mitigate some of the extra risk by wearing protective clothing.

Obviously you can't remove all risk, but riding around in a T shirt and flip flops pretty much guarantees you are going to get badly hurt if you drop the bike. This is so obvious, that it is a fundamentally stupid thing to do, and it doesn't actually bring any benefits other than staying a bit cooler.

A good analogy would be angle grinding or welding without goggles; you often get away with it for a while but sooner or later you are going to get hurt badly, and when it does your stupidity won't just affect you.

FWIW I put smoking, excessive drinking and recreational drug use in the same basket, they are all selfish acts.
 
Last edited:
Whilst it annoys me that people do ride in tshirts and shorts, it's not my place to tell them otherwise. If they're not aware of the risks then they're stupid, but if they are and it's a risk they're willing to take then it's their choice.
 
But that is just the thing, It does affect us.

Guy #1 gets knocked off his bike at 50mph by Muppet #1, Thankfully Guy #1 is wearing full gear so when he hits the floor sustains some bumps and bruises but all his skin and bones stay in tact or at worst he suffers a fracture/break which is resolved by a few hospital visits and a cast done and dusted, potential loss of earnings and loss to employers. This gets sorted by insurers fairly quickly and yes insurance premiums go up but there we go.

guy #2 gets knocked off his bike at 50mph by Muppet #2 and Guy#2 was wearing no gear but a helmet... Queue massive amounts of skin and potential limb loss, Massive NHS bills as well as substantial personal injury claims, Loss of earnings, extra cost to employers paying out Sick pay and potential significant impact on ones life and quality of life.

All for the want of around £800 worth of gear..... It just beggars belief.... Yes you can take the approach of it is my choice and my life I'll do what I want... but what about all of those you are majorly inconveniencing by doing such a selfish thing? and before you mention smoking, I regard smokers with similar contempt as I do those that ride with no gear.... Its selfish and irresponsible, You do not only affect yourself by this simple indulgence but everyone around you.
 
Or...
Guy #3 doesn't get knocked off as he's wearing hi-vis and has extra lights on his bike. Thinks guys 1 and 2 are both muppets for draining the NHS etc etc
 
Or...
Guy #3 doesn't get knocked off as he's wearing hi-vis and has extra lights on his bike. Thinks guys 1 and 2 are both muppets for draining the NHS etc etc

You're perhaps placing a little to much faith in the visibility equipment there. I ride with it every day, and I still have drivers doing manoeuvres as if they haven't seen me. The only way you can guarantee not being knocked off is to not go riding in the first place. For the time when you are, makes sense to kit up.

Which is what leaves me with a dislike about the current legal situation. You must wear a helmet. You are not obliged to wear anything else. Perhaps some people think that this means that just wearing a helmet will keep them alive in a crash.

If you really want to go down the "hey, it's all personal responsibility" route, then we should revoke the legal requirement to have a helmet. Let people decide entirely what they should wear. Or, if we do want a law that protects people from themselves, lets do it properly and not let people legally ride in a helmet and a pair of pants.
 
Nah, as I said earlier I'm just playing devils advocate. Hi vis and auxiliary lights are proven to cut down accidents, so I'm just saying why do some people want to pick and choose the sensible precautions everyone should take. Everyone draws a line somewhere, and for a lot of people that's not getting on a bike at all, for others it's wearing full kit, for the uber safety people it's full kit + hi viz and aux lights and right at the end it's all that plus ABS, traction control and riding like you're on an IAM test all the time. Everyone thinks thinks there own line is the right one.
 
Hi Vis vest does not reduce accident`s its a urban myth. The only thing proven to reduce accidents is a hi-vis helmet. That nugget of information was given to me by the police rider on a training course.

Lets do it properly and ban motorbikes, ban alcohol, ban smoking, ban fast food, ban fizzy pop all proven to be bad for you and at some point will be a drain on the NHS.


Any way its raining again so a great deal of folk will be in there textile jackets.... which are not cow hide..........
 
Hi Vis vest does not reduce accident`s its a urban myth. The only thing proven to reduce accidents is a hi-vis helmet. That nugget of information was given to me by the police rider on a training course.

Nah, it's not an urban myth - it's been proved in lots of research both for cycling and motorcycling. I don't wear it though - looks crap :p

I do have aux lights though as they look cool on my bike ;)
 
Depends, sometimes in winter i stick one on for the commute home, not everyday though as you say looks crap.

Infact as it seems this thread is for the daily mail readers in OCUK, lets make its law so that everytime you leave the house you need a hi-vis jacket on "just in case" and its proven to be safter than a beige duffel coat" :D
 
I agree OP, wholeheartedly.

I once came off at around 20mph in jeans (wearing gloves and jacket) on a scooter when i was 16 (don't judge me! I had it for a few weeks before selling it for a TS50X) and i have a big scar on the side of my thigh where i grazed through my jeans and onto my skin in about a second...
 
Back
Top Bottom