The issue here is that bikers are more likely to end up in hospital than car drivers.
I thought the big Hoo-Hah is generally over how they tend to die more, rather than get injured?
They impose a disproportionate cost on the NHS relative to other road users.
Not often through choice, though (see next quote).
But *do* they... Or do they just represent a higher death percentage on the statistics? Body bags cost far less than months of rehab...
It's a silly conclusion though, because the premise is silly.
Well yeah, very silly, since about 87% of all bike accidents invoving another vehicle are ruled as the fault of the other vehicle!
The better premise would be better and more frequent training of those loonies in the 'other vehicle' category... which also includes other motorcyclists, apparently!
It's one way of looking at it.
That's just an as-is perspective, though and does not factor in any changes in kit, culture, etc.
people tend to become less risk-averse when they know there are more safety devices ion place
Same goes for car drivers and I know there's a lot of them get injured. I see them almost weekly!
IMO, one of the biggest errors is to put things like Max Speed signs up on corners, as people usually try and do at least that speed. Far better to force them into reading the road, analysing their driving and taking it at what they feel is a safe approach. Usually that works out slower and safer, as it does on country roads (excluding the local drivers).
My point is that it's not simple. Laws tend to have lots and lots of unintended consequences.
No argument there.
I suspect a lot of it is not understanding the full nature of what's being ruled upon to begin with.
but at the end of the day its their own choice on their own safety.
fortunately my driving and riding is all I do worry about on the road don't worry. 