Skip to content

IIHS proposes death to motorcycling

May 30, 2013

IIHS petition requires ABS on new motorcycles
http://www.iihs.org/laws/petitions/pdf/petition%202013-05-30.pdf

This one will, over time, take motorcycles out of the picture.  No way
that you can CHEAPLY put ABS on a two wheel tiddler.  Then there is
the question, just how well does it work when leaned over….

IIHS Michigan helmet law study
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr053013.html

The brand new study is showing that “at the areas we looked at, it costs more.

http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4804.pdf

About these ads
2 Comments leave one →
  1. June 11, 2013 9:43 am

    The IIHS petition to require ABS on motorcycles does not portend “death to motorcycling.” As we’ve seen with other safety equipment, the cost of ABS will decline with a mandate because volume will increase. Cost was one of the arguments against requiring frontal airbags in passenger vehicles 20 years ago. Airbags didn’t make cars unaffordable. The cost per unit declined to the point where cars today have multiple airbags designed to protect heads, chests and even knees. Airbags are taken for granted now, and they’ve saved thousands of lives. ABS won’t kill motorcycling. What it will do is prevent a lot of crashes and prolong the lives of many motorcycle riders.

  2. goldiron permalink*
    June 11, 2013 10:18 am

    This one will over time take motorcycles out of the picture. No way that you can CHEAPLY put ABS on a two wheel tiddler. Then there is
    just how well does it work when leaned over….

    Second point. ABS does not prevent crashes, period. Crash survivability is not crash prevention. ABS will not extend the life of anybody. Actually, I take great umbrage at your tone. You are speaking for an insurance industry. Your main clients are drivers of other vehicles that include but are not limited to automobiles, SUVs, vans, and pickup trucks. It is your insured clients that are causing the majority of crashes and you are trying to make the motorcyclist victim, the bad guy. I respect your position and the myopic restraints that your environment has bestowed upon you. Let me see if I understand you correctly. You are in the business of making money and taking risks. Your clients have created too much exposure for your business and your fight with motorcyclists is the cost of injury or death caused by your clients. Your attack is designed to make motorcycling economically unattainable. Your clients that cause crashes obviously do not have to pass a vision test or otherwise, you would not witness your clients using the “I didn’t see ‘em” defense during the initial investigation, subsequent investigations and during litigation proceedings.

    To sum it up, Russ Rader, you want the motorcycles to become more expensive to possibly reduce your exposure to expensive claims based upon the idiocy and bad judgment of your clients.

    Slick public relations press releases will not reduce the crashes that your clients cause.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 532 other followers

%d bloggers like this: