Print Story Time to legal - 3 days.
Diary
By nightflameblue (Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 12:39:07 PM EST) (all tags)
In which we get nostalgic.


I was a stupid kid once too, you know.

I learned to ride motorcycle on a 1977 75cc Yamaha motorcross bike that had been bored out and hot rodded to the point where, you hit the throttle without controlling it, it WOULD throw you off. Geared down to ridiculous proportions on the low end, geared up on the high end. Rebuilt for hill climbs and bouncy-bounce cross tracks, stripped of all lights, and most anything that could be stripped off.

My first ride on it was down a gravel road.

Funny thing. I credit part of my motorcycle riding technique to my grandpa, a guy who can't even ride a bicycle as far as I know. Why? He taught me everything I know about manual transmissions. He had me running tractors at the age of three with him there with me. Had me running them on my own by seven. Had me driving a big grain truck in the fields and around the lots by the time I was thirteen. Anything with a manual transmission makes me think of everything he taught me.

It took me a few days of practice in pastures and on gravel before the hand clutch, foot shift became automatic for me. Once that happened, I did what any crazy idiot kid does. I went riding in the most dangerously crowded wooded area I could as fast as I could, jumping, sliding and essentially riding like a moron.

Back then it was as much utility as it was fun though. It was used to get the cows in for milking. It was used as a lookout on the highways when the tractors and implements were hauled long distances. It was used to move small items and people from point A to point B. It was used for fence checks and flood gap runs. It was the least fuel using go-to machine on the place to go to the off-home properties, and I used it for that a lot.

Oh, I had my share of spills. Believe me, I did. I can't remember a one when it wasn't something I brought on myself though. Getting knocked off the bike by a tree branch. Trying to jump something that really wasn't jumpable. Taking a corner too hard and thinking I could swing the rear around in time. Kicking up mud in the crick bottom and hitting a stone in a place I should have known it would be.

I've done my stupid.

Something happened between then and now. I guess you could say I grew up, though that would imply a maturity that, frankly, just isn't there. I guess I became a realist more than an idealist. I started asking more what if questions, instead of just approaching every moment as if it couldn't hurt me.

I climb on a bike now? I feel that little thrill deep down I always did, but it's not the thrill of finding danger like it used to be. It's the trill of finding ways to escape danger now. Knowing there's risk, but I've done everything I can to minimize it is as much of a thrill as the crazy-ass rides through the woods, dodging trees was then.

The difference of nearly 1400ccs between then and now is sizable, but the memories of control pounded into my head on every piece of equipment I've ever been on roll through and the power, though there, present, available, remains an undercurrent until I ask it to come forward. Someday, I'm sure, I will require it.

I think these thoughts as I see the older gentleman pull out into the highway right in front of me without a stitch of motorcycle gear on him, without so much as a beanie style helmet on his head, on his new big-ass Harley. Weaving back and forth, staring at his hands as if he just can't remember which is throttle and brake, which is clutch, speeding up, slowing down, crossing the center line, crossing the outside line. I leave plenty of space as I wonder at how people think lack of control is OK on the highway. Live the dream, but good grief learn control.

I wonder if I've gone overboard on caution. Riding jacket, new helmet, leather gloves, riding boots, riding pants, taking a safety oriented class, practicing in a parking lot for nearly three weeks. And then I see something like that man and realize, "that could have been me."

I'm not over-cautious. I'm a realist. I ride every time, even in the parking lot, as if I know I'm going down, but do everything I can to be ready to try and prevent it from happening.

I see thirty to thirty five bikes every day on the way in to work and the way back home. I see three helmets, and one of those on a guy riding a Vespa with a full-facer.

I'd rather hang with that dude on the Vespa than most of the others I see. He comes across as someone who also believes in being prepared.

To know I've done all I can is the best I can hope for. I question the judgment of others around me, but I don't judge them. They've made their choice. I've made mine.

In three days, I'll be testing my decision.

< Waterloo station .... | This sucks >
Time to legal - 3 days. | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
I don't always wear my seatbelt. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 01:36:52 PM EST
that doesn't mean that I'm not worth hanging out with I think.

These guys are playing the odds, just like you. How often do you get in an accident? pretty infrequently. Now, when it does happen on the bike, the gear can help (if it's a gentle sort of accident), and you (and I) are prepared. But the 99% of the time when you aren't in an accident, it can be nice not to be over dressed on a beautiful day. It's not smart, but I understand where they're coming from.

No windshield on my bike means I always need my fullface helmet just to keep bugs out of my teeth though.



Yeah. by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #3 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 01:40:51 PM EST
I know the argument. But honestly, today? I actually felt more comfortable with the venting on my jacket and helmet than I do without. It's not like you're stuck with hard leathers these days. Open mesh designs with hard armor in the strategic places pretty much means you're as safe as you can be while letting the breeze flow.

It's not like I have a hate-on for the helmetless. I just sort of think it's a decision I couldn't live with for myself. Then again, I'm not trying to escape anything in my life at this point. There was a time that wasn't the case.



[ Parent ]

Saftey. by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 01:38:24 PM EST
You are NOT being too cautious.  There are morons galore on the road without helmet or any gear what so ever. 

I like to call them "organ donors".  I might need a kidney one day.

Gedvondur
"I love my brain. It's the only organ I can afford to lose." --frijolito


There's a lot of folks by nightflameblue (4.00 / 1) #4 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 01:44:33 PM EST
pushing to make it illegal to ride without full gear in this state. I disagree with that idea. I think people should get to choose, even if they make what I consider to be the wrong choice.

Frankly, there just aren't enough ways to thin the herd as it is.

DISCLAIMER - That was (mostly) a joke.



[ Parent ]

Unintended consequences by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #5 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:07:24 PM EST
When they did that here in California, helmet companies immediately started selling minimal helmets that just exactly complied with the law to the formerly helmetless. These became popular and the usage of the full-face helmets (which are obviously lots safer) declined dramatically.

Laws like this are stupid, and should only ever apply to children.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

The beanie helmet. by nightflameblue (4.00 / 1) #9 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:29:29 PM EST
Those things are ridiculous. And people that aren't aware of how easy it is to plant your face in a bike wreck think it's a "safe" alternative to a full facer just because they see the DOT sticker on them.

There are few things in this world I truly despise anymore. Beanie helmets are one of those things.

And my feelings towards them are pretty darned mild compared to Mrs. NFB's feelings on them.



[ Parent ]

It meets DOT standards. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 03:30:42 PM EST
If you have a problem with the DOT standards, take it up with them, or better yet, follow your own standards and leave other riders the hell alone.

This coomenat has be n soidnsord by hurricanbe ice malt liqur
[ Parent ]

Dear friend, by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 04:50:11 PM EST
Please assist me by pointing out where, exactly, I attack any other rider? I stated hate for a helmet, not a rider.

[ Parent ]

Assuming you don't hate inanimate objects. . . by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #19 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 05:10:24 PM EST
which I hope you're above, then your hate must surely be reserved for the manufacturers, sellers and/or the purchasers of said helmets. That was absolutely implied by your post.

This coomenat has be n soidnsord by hurricanbe ice malt liqur
[ Parent ]

OK. by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #20 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 05:46:58 PM EST
And how does that translate to an attack on other riders? You told me to leave other riders the hell alone. Where, exactly, did I bother them?

I actually hate the design, because it's useless. It protects on small spot on the head. The DOT sticker is basically a "this helmet survives impact at this speed" and is not a stamp saying the design is safe. I understand that, other people don't. But I don't hate people that are uninformed.



[ Parent ]

Oh, okay. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #21 Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 12:48:59 AM EST

This coomenat has be n soidnsord by hurricanbe ice malt liqur
[ Parent ]

insurance rates by lolwhat (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:10:54 PM EST
Safety-gear-lacking fools to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't fuck other people. The thing is, the more Darwin Award nominees out there, the higher the insurance rates (vehicle, life, health, etc.) for everyone who rides, no matter how good an individual rider may be; that flunks the don't-fuck-other-people test in my book. Yes, the rate increases could be held down a bit with safe rider courses and such; but why should I, the safety-first, defensive-driving rider who wants to watch his son grow up, go through the hassle so I don't get massive insurance bills?

[ Parent ]

Because . . . by nightflameblue (2.00 / 0) #7 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:19:27 PM EST
either you give up two days and seventy five bucks to be certified safe or you say that the everyone else needs to live by your rules for yourself.

That makes the question a little more difficult than just saying, "make it law."

Don't get me wrong, I think people should be safe. But I also think nanny-state safety ends up not really working, and makes a lot of "freedom" nuts go k00ky.

[ Parent ]

s/fools to do whatever/fools can do whatever/ by lolwhat (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:20:45 PM EST


[ Parent ]

Slippery slopes by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #10 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:39:51 PM EST
By that argument, we should put everyone on house arrest, because it'll keep them safer, and thereby keep insurance rates low.
----
ウセーバラケダ
[ Parent ]

non sequitur by lolwhat (2.00 / 0) #15 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 03:53:14 PM EST
I'm not saying I mind people being unsafe. It's just that I do mind people being unsafe, then getting themselves killed, then the insurance company decides that despite my safe riding record, they'll jack up my rates 20% next year.

[ Parent ]

Because it's a lot better by notafurry (4.00 / 1) #11 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 02:53:03 PM EST
to pass a law requiring insurance companies to give you a break if you certify that you own and use safety gear. Then just add a field or checkbox to the traffic citation form, "was rider wearing full safety gear".

Presto. Individual freedom, lower rates for pussies like you who think freedom shouldn't cost them anything personally.

[ Parent ]

+4, ad hominem attack by lolwhat (2.00 / 0) #16 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 03:56:37 PM EST
You had a good point in the first sentence at least.

[ Parent ]

I thought it was more engaging to the reader. by notafurry (2.00 / 0) #17 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 04:17:54 PM EST
You know how it is.

[ Parent ]

Oh, I agree by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 03:10:04 PM EST
If they don't want to wear a brain-bucket or leathers well then fuck'em.  They can scramble their eggs and have a side of road rash.

When I was 15, I fell off of my 10 speed.  I had many more hours on a dirt bike, never failing to wear my helmet.  But on the 10 speed, I didn't wear one.  In 1985, a bicycle helmet meant one of three things:

1.  You were a pro bicycle rider.

2.  You were mentally handicapped and wore one everywhere.

3.  You liked getting your ass kicked for being a dork.

I don't remember the accident.  Or that whole day for that matter.  I woke up in the hospital about a day later and I didn't know who I was for about 10 minutes.  Scariest thing ever.

I spent a week in the hospital, three skull fractures and a major-assed concussion.  The Rosie O'Donnel of concussions.

So I wear my bucket.  Every time.  But I'm a free world kind of guy and I don't feel that some vague "insurance rates" argument really makes the grade of "hurting others by my actions".  So let those retards at ABATE splatter their brains and leave skin on the highway.  Not my problem.

Gedvondur
"I love my brain. It's the only organ I can afford to lose." --frijolito
[ Parent ]

I remember that. by nightflameblue (4.00 / 1) #13 Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 03:15:17 PM EST
I never rode bicycle with a helmet until the late nineties. Luckily, the worst I ever took in that time was a few skinned up legs and chainring impressions.

I'm glad I had a helmet the day I got swiped on the trails. I still remember the sickening sound of scraping coming from the side of the helmet as I came to ground. That, right there, is all the proof I needed that a helmet is a requirement at all times on two wheels.

But I don't preach that at people who believe otherwise. The evidence is out there if you're curious enough, or cautious enough to look it up. If not, meh.



[ Parent ]

Time to legal - 3 days. | 21 comments (21 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback