From: somerville@BAEPV2.NCSU.EDU (SOMERVILLE)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles,rec.autos.driving,ca.driving,rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Kill a Biker, Go to Jail. NOT!!!
Date: 6 Apr 92 11:44:45 GMT
Reply-To: somerville@BAEPV2.NCSU.EDU (SOMERVILLE)
Distribution: na
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Apr4.220820.19084@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, 
ashaw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (andrew.shaw) writes:
>
 [ Story of vehicular manslaughter deleted ]

>To me it implies one or more mistakes.  The driver made a mistake in
>pulling out.  The motorcyclist made a mistake in operating a vehicle
>with inadequate protection.
>

How does one avoid the latter mistake?  If you are killed when
the drunk driver of a semi moves over on you and crushes your car
into the barrier, should we say, "He was operating a vehicle
with inadequate protection against this kind of accident, so
it was really his own fault."

Nonsense. There is no such thing as a vehicle that provides adequate
protection against all possible hazards.  Just imagine how different
the world would be if we "judged" vehicles by their efficiency,
conservation of precious resources, production of harmful pollutants,
potential to kill other people, and health effects on the operator.
Instead, we place value on raw power, size, speed, and ability to
protect the *operator* from harm.  

There is generally no concern for the safety of *other* 
people -- we see it as their responsibility to protect themselves 
from our negligence.
It's no wonder people in general see no place for a vehicle 
such as a motorcyle, not to mention, God forbid, a human-powered 
contraption.

>
>16-wheelers don't run me off the road.  I can accelerate, deccellerate,
>and swerve faster than any 18-wheeler on the road.  I have also been
>hit many times by jackasses, but since I am protected in a nice steel
>cage, I have never even been injured.
>

Yeah, I guess the thousands of people (in "nice steel cages") who
are killed every year in auto accidents just aren't the driver
you are.  Do you really believe that your driving skills can
save you from every possible hazard, or that you could never
cause an accident as you swerve to avoid that semi?  Nonsense.
You can be injured or killed like anyone else, even in your
nice steel cage. 

>
>If you are operating a vehicle that you *know* offers you *no* protection
>in the event of a collision, and a collision happens (despite your own
>perfect operating skills and the mandatory imprisonment of every non-perfect 
>driver), don't you think you may have been negligent in your choice of
>vehicle?  BTW, having just been in a side collision, I can tell you that
>door beams are great.
>

If you are operating a vehicle that you *know* kills other people,
wastes precious natural resources, and is the single greatest agent
of harmful pollution known to man, ... well don't you think you may
have been negligent in your choice of vehicle?

Again, no vehicle offers all the protection all the time.  It is true
that motorcyles and bicycles trade protection for tremendous efficiency,
economy, reduction of pollution, reduction of traffic congestion, etc...  
This does not make the operator "negligent", it means they have a 
different value system than you with regard to choice of vehicle.  

BTW, bikers and cyclists can (and are often required) to use
safety equipment that significantly reduces their chance of serious
injury in many kinds of accidents.  Unfortunatly, the only way to
*perhaps* avoid serious damage from a two ton vehicle is to have
your own two ton (the heavier the better!) vehicle.    

>> if the driver were executed, said driver wouldn't kill any more cyclists. 
>
>Are you maintaining that there are serial cyclist-killers driving
>around?
>

Anyone can kill other road users.  They just have to be a little
negligent in their driving.  If we placed any value on the life
of the "other" guy, we might conclude that we can not afford to
give second, third, etc. chances to the driver who has demonstrated
negligence in the past (the kind that results in death).

>
>Well, I'm all for more training and stringent licensing requirements.
>But if you think that you can create the perfect, risk-free environment,
>you are sadly mistaken.
>
>	Andrew

Just as you are sadly mistaken to think you are safe in your cage.

--
Garth Somerville
somerville@bae.ncsu.edu