Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
coast-to-coast...)

I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
that seen among pilots.

And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.

It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article . com>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

Thirty years ago, when I was in college, I thought about riding
motorcycles. I decided to so some research and found a collection of
medial reports about injuries found in motorcycle accident victims.
After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
future.

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have owned:
198? Yamaha 250cc dirt bike
1985 900cc Ninja (the first tht came out, same model as the one Tom
Cruise rode in "Top Gun") I was a senior in High School.
1970 Harley Davidons Electraglide. Bought from an estate for
$1,350.00, took apart, cleaned and reinstalled the carburator and new
batery and she roared to life on first try. Awesome machine. Sold her
for $9,000.00 for down payment on my first house.
1988 Suzuki GSXR750. Just to carve the back roads with.

I now only have a basket case ( I took it apart years ago with the
intention of totally rebuilding it) 197? 750cc Suzuki two stroke
(shoiuld be very fast vintage cafe racer). It and a 1982 Honda VT
Ascot were given to me by a friend who didn't have the room, he stored
them at my place and after seven-eight years, told me to throw them
away. I gave the Ascott to my current neighbor who is rebuilding the
carb on it right now.

I still ride every now and then my brother in-laws 2005 Kawasaki 900
Ninja. Oh yeah, I bought my 9 year old daughtera 50cc dirtbike that I
also ride around on the trails behind our house and also in out
cul-de-sac. :-)

Monk

Jay Honeck wrote:

> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

No, yes. I'll buy a bike again once finances permit. Right now I'm
taking an online masters and my oldest daughter enters college in two
months for the start of 12 continuous years of college bills (3 kids, 4
years apart in school). I won't be doing much flying or riding any time
soon.

Matt

john smith wrote:

> In article . com>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
> Thirty years ago, when I was in college, I thought about riding
> motorcycles. I decided to so some research and found a collection of
> medial reports about injuries found in motorcycle accident victims.
> After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
> rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
> future.

Did you read about the car accidents also? Do you still drive?

Matt

jay, yep, i still ride a bike (1700cc yamaha warrior...v-twin) and i
will say that your analysis of the similarity is good. on a bike, as in
a plane, you have your life in your own hands. it's all up to you. i
will say that over the years, my idea of a good bike ride has shifted a
bit. a couple of hours being bounced in a convection-oven (houston
summer at 80mph) is about all i can take, or want to take, any more.
lately, i'll confess to looking at the bike and thinking how much it
would bring in a.m.u.

dan
Jay Honeck wrote:
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article >,
Matt Whiting > wrote:

> john smith wrote:
>
> > In article . com>,
> > "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> >>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> >>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> >
> >
> > Thirty years ago, when I was in college, I thought about riding
> > motorcycles. I decided to so some research and found a collection of
> > medial reports about injuries found in motorcycle accident victims.
> > After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
> > rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
> > future.

> Did you read about the car accidents also? Do you still drive?

In a car or truck, I at least have something around me that is going to
take the first blow. Airbags and crumple zones work, I have witnessed
the results.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
<< snip >>
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --

Used to, wife and I both. Parked both two-wheelers about ten years ago.
Still have the license, but no desire.

>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
My wife enjoys flying with me...but she won't let me get a bike, not
even a little one for around town.

She doesnt think it's safe :)

More $$ for flying, I guess!

--Don
Don Byrer
Commercial Pilot / CFI Student
Electronics Technician, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
Amateur Radio KJ5KB

"I have slipped the surly bonds of earth; now if I can just land without bending the gear..."
"I know what it sounds like....when doves cry" (Bird Strike 8/29/05)

Yes, begin when I was 17. Rode many years, no injuries, a
few close calls. Avoiding homicidal car drivers was biggest
concern. Had a number of bikes, a Triumph TR120 early on
and the Honda XL250 was my last bike. I hope to get a
Harley Sportster one of these days.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip,
the riding
| experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't
get to ride
| much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
| coast-to-coast...)
|
| I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and
flying.
| Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar
handling
| characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of
banking into turns
| is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is
very similar to
| that seen among pilots.
|
| And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by
someone else's (or
| your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened
sense of "being
| alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
|
| It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles,
but that seems
| to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group --
do you
| currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|
|
|
|
|
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|

> Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

No, and no. I have ridden mopeds on Block Island though. :)

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"houstondan" > wrote:
> jay, yep, i still ride a bike (1700cc yamaha warrior...v-twin) and i
> will say that your analysis of the similarity is good. on a bike, as in
> a plane, you have your life in your own hands. it's all up to you. i
> will say that over the years, my idea of a good bike ride has shifted a
> bit. a couple of hours being bounced in a convection-oven (houston
> summer at 80mph) is about all i can take, or want to take, any more.
> lately, i'll confess to looking at the bike and thinking how much it
> would bring in a.m.u.

My husband and I used to ride a lot. He does not fly. I see the
similarities in the passions for both and miss the bikes. However, I
disagree that on the bike, "it's all up to you". Where we lived, the
area had become so congested that the part of the risk factor that is
attributed to *other people* was far greater than the other-pilots
aspect of flying. There's risk in both, but I don't feel nearly as
vulnerable in an airplane as I do on the bike anymore. That
question-and-answer exchange -- "Why don't you ride anymore?" "It's too
dangerous!" -- coming from a pilot always gets some funny reactions.

That said, I still think bikes are a lot of fun and miss an occasional
ride.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

After a 15 year hiatus I just bought a new motorcycle. Yes there are
similarities. But I have to admit, the $10 breakfasts are easier on the
wallet than the $100 hamburger!

--
Chris Ehlbeck, PP-ASEL
"It's a license to learn, have fun and buy really expensive hamburgers."

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
I've ridden since 1968, I just learned to fly three years ago. I now fly
more than I ride, but enjoy both. Wife won't do either one, sigh...

Brad

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message

> Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

Haven't ridden in about 25 years - no particular reason, just other
interests predominant. Rode extensively through the 70s, particularly
mid-late. Owned 5 bikes: a '67 BSA 650, '69 Triumph 650, '72 Honda 750,
and two bikes I built in custom frames - one with a late 50s Harley engine,
one with a Honda 750. That Honda four in a low frame with a long wheelbase
was the best road bike I owned. Smooth as silk, but not much torque, so you
had to manage the powerband-not a real big issue. Crossed the country at
least once on each of them except the Harley custom, which I sold shortly
after building it. Total cross-country treks = 6, about 2/3 off highway.
Never had to lay a bike down; never had any trouble with other motorists.
Good old days.

Jay Honeck wrote:
<snip>
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

No way in hell. I'm afraid of heights and yes, that includes the three
feet off the ground on a bike. Waaaaaay too easy to fall off.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

I still have my old '65 Beemer out in the shed, I drove it daily for 15+
years and nearly rolled the odometer over, but now I haven't even cranked for
some 20 years.

Vaughn

On 7/1/06 8:35 AM, in article
. com, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

Yep and yep. Started on a Honda 250XL, learning out in the desert and then
once I got comfortable, to college. Imagine riding to art class with a
drawing board strapped to your back. I felt like a hang glider.

Now I own and ride a Honda ST 1100.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

("john smith" wrote)
> After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
> rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
> future.


So you went out and got married, instead.

Selective research! <g>


Montblack

("Emily" wrote)
> No way in hell. I'm afraid of heights and yes, that includes the three
> feet off the ground on a bike. Waaaaaay too easy to fall off.


There's a Harley shirt that speaks to that very possibility. :-)


Montblack

In article . com>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

I started flying 1987. I started riding 2004.

Flying is a passion. Riding is kind of neat and useful.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
> Wot say the group -- do you currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the
> past?


New - 1978 Yahmahopper 360. (I was 185 lbs back then!!)
New - 1981 Yahmahopper 650 Special II - backrest, luggage rack, roll bar,
windscreen.

Rode day and night, rain or shine, for three years. Got hit by a (smallish)
deer on the 650. I stayed up, the deer went down - gas tank was dented by my
knee.

I rode around on a my brother's 1978 Honda CB 750A Hondamatic, this spring.
Chose not to buy it.

That was the first time I was on a bike since Nov of 1984.

Still have my bike license. Combined miles over 6 years - 36K, IIRC.


Montblack

john smith wrote:
> In article >,
> Matt Whiting > wrote:
>
>
>>john smith wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article . com>,
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>>>
>>>
>>>Thirty years ago, when I was in college, I thought about riding
>>>motorcycles. I decided to so some research and found a collection of
>>>medial reports about injuries found in motorcycle accident victims.
>>>After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
>>>rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
>>>future.
>
>
>>Did you read about the car accidents also? Do you still drive?
>
>
> In a car or truck, I at least have something around me that is going to
> take the first blow. Airbags and crumple zones work, I have witnessed
> the results.

True, but it is still more dangerous than walking or staying home.

Matt

Emily wrote:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
> No way in hell. I'm afraid of heights and yes, that includes the three
> feet off the ground on a bike. Waaaaaay too easy to fall off.

So why are you reading this ng? :-)

Matt

Bob Noel wrote:

> In article . com>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
> I started flying 1987. I started riding 2004.
>
> Flying is a passion. Riding is kind of neat and useful.

You simply haven't yet ridden long enough. I started riding at age 10
or so, flying at 18. Both are passions, but sometimes we have to put
our passions on the back burner when kids, mortgages and college bills
come along. But I'll be back...

Matt

Jay Honeck wrote:
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?


Let me leave you with three thoughts:

1) Compound fractures from insufficient sheet metal around you
2) Scrambled brains from no helmet
3) Road rash from no leathers

I have taken care of several suffering from 1, 2, and/or 3. It ain't pretty.
It ain't fun either... for either of us.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>
> I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
> Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
> characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
> is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
> that seen among pilots.
>
> And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
> your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
> alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Riding looks and sounds like such fun - probably as much as flying. BUT, in
flying, the "other" guy only causes a very small percentage of the
accidents. In riding bikes, the "other guy" causes what, 50% of the
accidents? I have a very hard time putting my life in the "other guy's"
hands. Especially when s/he isn't paying attention, is talking on a cell
phone, isn't looking for motorcycles sharing the road, etc.

I'll stick to <more or less> controlling my own destiny.

KB

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Wot say the group -- do you currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the
> past?

I bought a Honda CB650 ten years ago. I stopped riding it three years ago
when the float valve stuck and it poured a gallon of gasonline on my leg on
the way to work.

I bought a CBR1000 yesterday. Here we go again.

I think the majority of the airplane owners at my airport also own a bike
(or 2)

> Let me leave you with three thoughts:
>
> 1) Compound fractures from insufficient sheet metal around you

Yep, that sucks. Not much can be done about it, either.

> 2) Scrambled brains from no helmet

Always, always, ALWAYS wear a full-face helmet. Always.

> 3) Road rash from no leathers

Always, always, ALWAYS wear leather on tour. It sucks when it's hot,
but road rash hurts more than it sucks.

I've been down once, on a 1966 Honda 160 (this would've been in '86 or
so, so it was already an "antique"/beater) when I hit gravel. I was
wearing a leather coat, gloves and helmet. The ONLY unprotected part
of me was my wrist, between my glove and my sleeve -- and it looked
like hamburger when I got up.

The very first thing that hit the ground was my head -- there was no
time to even raise my arm to protect it, even though I was going pretty
slowly. The helmet saved the old brain box, for sure.

> I have taken care of several suffering from 1, 2, and/or 3. It ain't pretty.
> It ain't fun either... for either of us.

I hear what you're saying, but you can either live, or wait to die. I
do everything in my power to protect myself (and my riders -- who
include my children) from harm, but fully understand that the risks I'm
taking are very similar to flying.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
>
> Let me leave you with three thoughts:
>
> 1) Compound fractures from insufficient sheet metal around you

This is only much of an advantage below about 40 MPH. Much above that
it you're toast if you hit an immovable object. And this holds true
with many airplane accidents. They are not built at all for collision
protection. And to do so for the speeds involved would simply involve
too much weight.


> 2) Scrambled brains from no helmet

Easily remedied as I always wear a helmet.


> 3) Road rash from no leathers

Ditto.


> I have taken care of several suffering from 1, 2, and/or 3. It ain't pretty.
> It ain't fun either... for either of us.

Is the suffering any less than for people injured in airplane accidents,
car accidents, fires, falls, skiing accidents, etc.?

The reality is that many people simply have an irrational bias against
motorcycles. I'm not sure why, but I come across it all the time. And
the really strange part is that many of these folks fly, downhill ski,
rock climb, chain smoke, drink like fiends, etc. I consider downhill
skiing much more risky than motorcycling. I personally know many more
people who have incurred severe injuries from skiing than from
motorcycle. And these injuries often never heal well (knees in particular).

Everyone has their biases and they seldom are rationally based. That's
just life I guess.

Matt

Kyle Boatright wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
>>experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
>>much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
>>coast-to-coast...)
>>
>>I'm always struck by the similarities between riding and flying.
>>Basically, riding is 2-dimensional flying, with similar handling
>>characteristics and risk factors. The geometry of banking into turns
>>is identical, and the camaraderie with fellow riders is very similar to
>>that seen among pilots.
>>
>>And, of course, the risk of instant death caused by someone else's (or
>>your own) stupidity is always present. That heightened sense of "being
>>alive" is something both riders and flyers seem to crave.
>>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>>--
>>Jay Honeck
>>Iowa City, IA
>>Pathfinder N56993
>>www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>"Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
> Riding looks and sounds like such fun - probably as much as flying. BUT, in
> flying, the "other" guy only causes a very small percentage of the
> accidents. In riding bikes, the "other guy" causes what, 50% of the
> accidents? I have a very hard time putting my life in the "other guy's"
> hands. Especially when s/he isn't paying attention, is talking on a cell
> phone, isn't looking for motorcycles sharing the road, etc.

I don't know the stats for sure, but, yes, it is the cage drivers I
worry about most when riding. I've been lucky in that I've ridden on
the street for nearly 30 years with nary a misshap. A few close calls,
but nothing that scared me off. My only serious motor vehicle accident
occurred last December when a drunk pulled out in front of my son and me
and totaled our minivan. Things like that are just really hard to
avoid. However, life has risk and I prefer to accept those risks to do
what I enjoy. Living a dull life has its own risk.

Matt

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
> The ONLY unprotected part of me was my wrist, between my glove and my
> sleeve -- and it looked like hamburger when I got up.


I used soft leather, rust colored, welding gloves. They kept the wind from
going up my wrists.


Montblack

Matt Whiting wrote:
>> 2) Scrambled brains from no helmet
>
> Easily remedied as I always wear a helmet.


South Carolina doesn't require it. I always look hard at the motorcyclist if he
doesn't have a helmet so I can recognize him when he's assigned to me later.
<G>

> Is the suffering any less than for people injured in airplane accidents,
> car accidents, fires, falls, skiing accidents, etc.?


I got broken up pretty bad in an airplane accident and it hurt like hell.
However, I did not have road rash. Nor were my brains scrambled... I've always
been this way. <G>


> The reality is that many people simply have an irrational bias against
> motorcycles. I'm not sure why, but I come across it all the time. And
> the really strange part is that many of these folks fly, downhill ski,
> rock climb, chain smoke, drink like fiends, etc. I consider downhill
> skiing much more risky than motorcycling. I personally know many more
> people who have incurred severe injuries from skiing than from
> motorcycle. And these injuries often never heal well (knees in particular).



I don't have a bias against motorcyclists but I'll share the lecture I give to
those who get hurt badly (from any cause): Now you know lightning doesn't
always strike the other guy. This doesn't mean you have to become afraid to
come out from under the covers or stop living. What it should mean is that you
should evaluate your risk with more thought than you have in the past. I know
every man, particularly young man, is afflicted with the sense of his own
invulnerbility. But now you know you can be hurt and hurt badly. So, after you
heal, just give some thought to what you want to do. I'll be willing to bet
there will be some things that no longer seem worth taking the chance. Five
years from now this experience won't seem like it was so bad. But I really
doubt you'd want to repeat it.

That's my philosophy, anyway. I gave up banging other men's wives, I no longer
skydive, I don't dive deep or fly low any more. But I didn't stop having fun.
I just stopped the suicidal stuff.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:

> That's my philosophy, anyway. I gave up banging other men's wives, I no longer
> skydive, I don't dive deep or fly low any more. But I didn't stop having fun.
> I just stopped the suicidal stuff.

The trouble is your definition of suicidal might not be mine.

Matt

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
>
> I bought a Honda CB650 ten years ago. I stopped riding it three years ago
> when the float valve stuck and it poured a gallon of gasonline on my leg
> on the way to work.

Wouldn't it have been easier, simpler, and more sensible to simply fix the
float valve?

Matt Whiting wrote:
My only serious motor vehicle accident
> occurred last December when a drunk pulled out in front of my son and me
> and totaled our minivan. Things like that are just really hard to
> avoid. However, life has risk and I prefer to accept those risks to do
> what I enjoy. Living a dull life has its own risk.
>
> Matt

What would have been the end result if you and your son had been on a
motorcycle when the drunk pulled out in front of you?

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:1151757324.076849.205190
@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:

<Snipola>
> do you currently ride a motorcycle?
<Snipola>

I've been riding for almost 20 years, but haven't got my
wings yet. :(

However, I want to address all the naysayers and negative
attitude towards safety on a bike.

Yes, it does come with more risks, which I like to sum up
as, "there's no such things as a fender bender on a bike".

Now, of those 20 years of riding, 19 have been in Orange
and LA counties. It's dangerous, and I nearly gave it up
when I was having more close calls than I could deal with.
I was on the verge of going postal on somebody, and some
did lose their mirrors or get dented doors.

But I then thought hard about it and realized, either I
give up the bike, or change the way I ride. I could not
continue with the way things were.

I chose to change the way I ride.

I now take active, positive, and if necessary, aggressive
control of my driving situation. If I sense even the
slightest hint of danger (the list of hints is huge),
then I do something to remove that danger from my presense.
I now have the attitude on the road that I *DO* own it
and to hell with everybody else and to hell with the
laws. I liken it to combat at zero AGL where everyone else
is out to kill you kamikaze style, and you have no weapons
to defend yourself. But that's an extreme. I don't always
have to be hell bent for leather. pardon the pun :)

I could probably write a book on what I've learned and why
I think it works, and I'm sure I could get into some mighty
flame wars over it if I were to discuss it here. All I know
is that what I'm doing now DOES work, and every time I try
to change it, I have more problems.

I guess my point is, because hardly anyone drives properly
anymore, you can't just sit back and expect things to be
hunkey dory. Too many people get behind the wheel and just
'zone' from point A to point B. Helmets, leathers, and all
that are just icing on the cake. They do nothing to protect
you from getting into a situation to begin with. For that,
you have to use your number one weapon, and that's the grey
stuff between your ears.

Riding a motorcycle isn't for everybody, just like flying.
Some people can do it better than others. Some are really
bad at it, and it's better that they don't.

BTW, I have an '86 Harley Sportster 883.

ps. I have had one minor accident on the bike, not my fault,
uninjured. But I learned a lot that day.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 17:39:33 +0000, Matt Whiting wrote:

> True, but it is still more dangerous than walking or staying home.

Dunno. I get pretty irritable if I've not flown recently. And it would
be a long walk to the airport. Safer to spend less time exposed to
meteorites by driving as quickly as I can to the airport.

- Andrew

RomeoMike wrote:
>
>
> Matt Whiting wrote:
> My only serious motor vehicle accident
>
>> occurred last December when a drunk pulled out in front of my son and
>> me and totaled our minivan. Things like that are just really hard to
>> avoid. However, life has risk and I prefer to accept those risks to
>> do what I enjoy. Living a dull life has its own risk.
>>
>> Matt
>
>
> What would have been the end result if you and your son had been on a
> motorcycle when the drunk pulled out in front of you?

No way to know. I'd have been going a lot slower at impact as the
brakes on minivans aren't anything to write home about. I also might
have been able to avoid the collision, but there is simply no way to be
sure.

In any event, it doesn't matter. Life has risks and I accept that.
Some folks can handle that and some sit on the couch and watch TV ...
and die of hardening of the arteries. I'd rather go out with a bang.


Matt

> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
Reading about the other guys' bikes brought back fond memories. I've been riding since about 9 years old.

I've owned:
Bridgestone 7 (anyone remember those)?
(2) Honda 90's (one was the 5 hp model with the long carb slide. It was cut down to size).
Honda SL350 I was 14 and thought this thing was a power house).
AMC Harley 125 (piece of crap)!
Suzuki 185 (Highly modified. Started racing motocross and hare & hound races with this one).
Suzuki RM 125 motocrosser (also highly modified).
Kawasaki KX 250 dirt bike.
Suzuki RM 465 motocrosser
Suzuki GS 1100 street bike (in the barn awaiting restoration).

Not currently riding. Almost had a mid life crisis and bought a Goldwing a couple of years ago. The wife said no!

Joe Schneider
N8437R



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

> I used soft leather, rust colored, welding gloves. They kept the wind from
> going up my wrists.

On the way home from Wisconsin yesterday, with Becca riding on the
back, I had my leather jacket sleeves unsnapped, due to the heat. This
allowed the wind to flow up my arms, albeit somewhat restricted by the
fairing and windshield -- which didn't seem to impede the bee that
managed to fly in there, and sting me on the forearm!

At first I thought I had been hit with a stone, but it kept hurting
long after the initial "impact". Luckily, I'm not allergic to bee
stings, and it went away in a few minutes...but that's the first time
*that* has ever happened before.

(Although I DID once get hit smack in the middle of my forehead, above
the windshield, below my helmet, and above my sunglasses, by what felt
like a bumble-bee. Darned near knocked me off the bike! Another
reason I now wear a full-face helmet.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

> I now take active, positive, and if necessary, aggressive
> control of my driving situation. If I sense even the
> slightest hint of danger (the list of hints is huge),
> then I do something to remove that danger from my presense.
> I now have the attitude on the road that I *DO* own it
> and to hell with everybody else and to hell with the
> laws.

I agree with you...to a point.

There are many, MANY hints of impending danger when riding, and many
little tricks that I've learned to spot it well in advance. These
hints, when detected, require action to be taken NOW, without
hesitation -- whether it means flashing your bright lights, beeping
your horn, or hitting the binders. He who hesitates is lost,
especially when you're surrounded by brain-dead motorists.

Luckily, my only riding since the kids were born (16 years ago) has
been largely rural, cross-country cycling -- and damned little of that.
Of course, there was a guy my age that was killed here last week when
a deer jumped out in front of him -- so "rural" doesn't always mean
"safe", either...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

> > After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
> > rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
> > future.

> So you went out and got married, instead.
> Selective research! <g>

More variables, less reliable data. I opted for the empirical research.

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> On the way home from Wisconsin yesterday, with Becca riding on the
> back, I had my leather jacket sleeves unsnapped, due to the heat. This
> allowed the wind to flow up my arms, albeit somewhat restricted by the
> fairing and windshield -- which didn't seem to impede the bee that
> managed to fly in there, and sting me on the forearm!
>
> At first I thought I had been hit with a stone, but it kept hurting
> long after the initial "impact". Luckily, I'm not allergic to bee
> stings, and it went away in a few minutes...but that's the first time
> *that* has ever happened before.
>
> (Although I DID once get hit smack in the middle of my forehead, above
> the windshield, below my helmet, and above my sunglasses, by what felt
> like a bumble-bee. Darned near knocked me off the bike! Another
> reason I now wear a full-face helmet.)

Been hit by a bumblebee in the forehead by a bumblebee, also. I saw it
coming, even!

I also was zooming around the outside of a corner (those sharp, almost
hairpin, banked ones, you love to zoom around in the mountains), and a car
coming at me on the inside of the corner got off the road, and kicked up a
piece of gravel. I suppose it hit my cheek at close to 60 MPG. I was lucky
to keep control, and get stopped. It left quite a strawberry bruise.

I still hate full face helmets, though. I think that is one part of the
equation I'll still have to risk.
--
Jim in NC

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:1151811765.345086.45160
@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:

>> I now take active, positive, and if necessary, aggressive
>> control of my driving situation. If I sense even the
>> slightest hint of danger (the list of hints is huge),
>> then I do something to remove that danger from my presense.
>> I now have the attitude on the road that I *DO* own it
>> and to hell with everybody else and to hell with the
>> laws.
>
> I agree with you...to a point.
>
> There are many, MANY hints of impending danger when riding, and many
> little tricks that I've learned to spot it well in advance.

Yes, and although one could write them all down for others
to memorize, experience is the best teacher.

For example, when I see a vehicle stopped on a cross road
or driveway, I look at the front wheel. It's much easier
to notice the wheel turning slightly than it is to notice
the vehicles forward motion. If the wheel is turning, the
vehicle is moving.

These new fangled spinning hubcaps should be banned IMNSHO.
My first encounter with them caused me to slam on my brakes.

Another one is that I somehow can sense when a person is
about to make a lane change. There've been many times my
"spidey sense started tingling" and I had the hunch that
a vehicle was about to change lanes. Sure enough they did.
This one bugs me as many times I cannot figure out what
the clue was that I was obviously picking up on. I do have
a habit of looking in peoples mirrors in the vehicle I'm
following, so maybe I'm noticing them looking around. But
I don't always notice it consciously.

Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
at a red light. Then, I take off fast enough to stay ahead
of everybody, only to catch up to the next block of cars
stopped at the next red light. This one works best on
routes that one travels frequently and knowledge of the
timing of the signals along that route. The upshot is that
I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.


> These
> hints, when detected, require action to be taken NOW, without
> hesitation -- whether it means flashing your bright lights, beeping
> your horn, or hitting the binders. He who hesitates is lost,
> especially when you're surrounded by brain-dead motorists.

Absolutely. Again, this only comes with experience, but you
must become the bike. You can't think about what you need
to do. It must just happen. You decide you need to maneuver
to a certain position and it just happens. A person doesn't
normally think about how to pick up a leg and how to bend
the joints in order to step forward. They just do it.

I may have forgot to say this, but this is why my tactics
work for me, and may not work for anyone else.

There have been times I've reacted to a situation only to
pause and wonder how on Earth I did it.


> Luckily, my only riding since the kids were born (16 years ago) has
> been largely rural, cross-country cycling -- and damned little of that.
> Of course, there was a guy my age that was killed here last week when
> a deer jumped out in front of him -- so "rural" doesn't always mean
> "safe", either...

Lately I have not been riding as much as I used to. I used
to ride every day. It was my primary transportation. In fact,
I've ridden so little lately that my clutch hand has got weak.
Harley's are known for their tight clutches. After 20 minutes
my arm is killing me now.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote
>
>> On the way home from Wisconsin yesterday, with Becca riding on the
>> back, I had my leather jacket sleeves unsnapped, due to the heat. This
>> allowed the wind to flow up my arms, albeit somewhat restricted by the
>> fairing and windshield -- which didn't seem to impede the bee that
>> managed to fly in there, and sting me on the forearm!
>>
>> At first I thought I had been hit with a stone, but it kept hurting
>> long after the initial "impact". Luckily, I'm not allergic to bee
>> stings, and it went away in a few minutes...but that's the first time
>> *that* has ever happened before.
>>
>> (Although I DID once get hit smack in the middle of my forehead, above
>> the windshield, below my helmet, and above my sunglasses, by what felt
>> like a bumble-bee. Darned near knocked me off the bike! Another
>> reason I now wear a full-face helmet.)
>
> Been hit by a bumblebee in the forehead by a bumblebee, also. I saw it
> coming, even!
>
> I also was zooming around the outside of a corner (those sharp, almost
> hairpin, banked ones, you love to zoom around in the mountains), and a
> car coming at me on the inside of the corner got off the road, and
> kicked up a piece of gravel. I suppose it hit my cheek at close to 60
> MPG. I was lucky to keep control, and get stopped. It left quite a
> strawberry bruise.
>
> I still hate full face helmets, though. I think that is one part of the
> equation I'll still have to risk.

I too have been struck by a large bug in the face. It was
about the size of a bumble bee, although I think it may
have been one of them large green 'japanese' beetles we
get here in So Cal. Hit me on the lower lip, splitting it
against my teeth. Well....I was doing about 90 at the time.

Hey, it was on the freeway, and believe me, traffic wasn't
much slower. For those familiar, I had just transitioned
from the 91 east to the 15 south in Corona. Years ago when
I'd go out that way often, I found that at times the flow
of traffic was 80-85.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

In article >,
Skywise > wrote:

> Absolutely. Again, this only comes with experience, but you
> must become the bike. You can't think about what you need
> to do. It must just happen.

Charlie: What were you thinking?

Mav: If you think, you're dead.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

"Skywise" > wrote

> Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
> scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
> at a red light.

Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
are pulling forward.

Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.
--
Jim in NC

JJS wrote:

>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>>--
>>Jay Honeck
>>Iowa City, IA
>>Pathfinder N56993
>>www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>"Your Aviation Destination"
>>
>
> Reading about the other guys' bikes brought back fond memories. I've been riding since about 9 years old.
>
> I've owned:
> Bridgestone 7 (anyone remember those)?
> (2) Honda 90's (one was the 5 hp model with the long carb slide. It was cut down to size).
> Honda SL350 I was 14 and thought this thing was a power house).
> AMC Harley 125 (piece of crap)!
> Suzuki 185 (Highly modified. Started racing motocross and hare & hound races with this one).
> Suzuki RM 125 motocrosser (also highly modified).
> Kawasaki KX 250 dirt bike.
> Suzuki RM 465 motocrosser
> Suzuki GS 1100 street bike (in the barn awaiting restoration).
>
> Not currently riding. Almost had a mid life crisis and bought a Goldwing a couple of years ago. The wife said no!

If you listened to the wife, then it wasn't a real MLC! :-)

I've owned only four motorcycles in my 30+ years:

1970 (I think) Chibi - how many folks ever heard of those?

1973 KZ100 Kawasaki (at least I think it was a KZ model, they had two
different 100s that year, one that had a dual range transmission. I
didn't have that one)

1976 KH400 Kawasaki (one of the famous two-stroke triples. Fun bike,
but only 35 MPG!)

1987 ZG1200 Kawasaki

I sold the last one two years ago as Kawasaki had told the AVA (American
Voyager Association) that a new model was in the works and imminent.
When they dropped the Voyager from the line-up in 2004 I was sure the
new one was just around the corner. Then someone offered me way too
much money for mine so I sold it thinking I'd buy the new one in the
fall when the new models came out. Then Kawasaki reneged on the deal
and decided not to build a new touring model. I'm still ticked at them
and likely won't buy a Kaw as my next ride even though I have a long
history with them.

The only bikes that I really like now are a couple of the BMW models,
the K1200LT in particular, although I'm waiting for a full-dresser to be
built around their new inline 4 engine. Trouble is, the nearest BMW
dealer is 80 miles away. My next in line is the Yamaha FJR1300, but it
lacks electronic cruise control which my old wrist needs for long
distance riding. I couldn't believe Yamaha put a gimmick electric
shifter on this model last year yet overlooks something with true
utility like cruise control. I haven't see any sales figures for the AE
model, but I'll be astonished if it sells well.


Matt

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>I used soft leather, rust colored, welding gloves. They kept the wind from
>>going up my wrists.
>
>
> On the way home from Wisconsin yesterday, with Becca riding on the
> back, I had my leather jacket sleeves unsnapped, due to the heat. This
> allowed the wind to flow up my arms, albeit somewhat restricted by the
> fairing and windshield -- which didn't seem to impede the bee that
> managed to fly in there, and sting me on the forearm!
>
> At first I thought I had been hit with a stone, but it kept hurting
> long after the initial "impact". Luckily, I'm not allergic to bee
> stings, and it went away in a few minutes...but that's the first time
> *that* has ever happened before.
>
> (Although I DID once get hit smack in the middle of my forehead, above
> the windshield, below my helmet, and above my sunglasses, by what felt
> like a bumble-bee. Darned near knocked me off the bike! Another
> reason I now wear a full-face helmet.)

I agree on the full-face helmet and leather jacket. I got hit in the
chest by a crow one day and I'm really glad I had my jacket on. I also
rode occasionally with dress shoes when going to work. Then one day a
rock about the size of a tennis ball came off a dump truck in the
opposing lane. It headed under the bike so I thought it would just hit
under the engine and I'd be fine. I had my feet on the highway pegs and
that rock bounced behind the front wheel, under the engine and came up
and hit the inside of my right ankle (right on the bone) knocking my
foot off the peg. Man did that hurt! Didn't break anything (I've got
tough bones), but I had a goose egg for weeks afterwards. So I
recommend good boots as well...


Matt

Morgans wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote
>
>
>> On the way home from Wisconsin yesterday, with Becca riding on the
>>back, I had my leather jacket sleeves unsnapped, due to the heat. This
>>allowed the wind to flow up my arms, albeit somewhat restricted by the
>>fairing and windshield -- which didn't seem to impede the bee that
>>managed to fly in there, and sting me on the forearm!
>>
>>At first I thought I had been hit with a stone, but it kept hurting
>>long after the initial "impact". Luckily, I'm not allergic to bee
>>stings, and it went away in a few minutes...but that's the first time
>>*that* has ever happened before.
>>
>>(Although I DID once get hit smack in the middle of my forehead, above
>>the windshield, below my helmet, and above my sunglasses, by what felt
>>like a bumble-bee. Darned near knocked me off the bike! Another
>>reason I now wear a full-face helmet.)
>
>
> Been hit by a bumblebee in the forehead by a bumblebee, also. I saw it
> coming, even!
>
> I also was zooming around the outside of a corner (those sharp, almost
> hairpin, banked ones, you love to zoom around in the mountains), and a car
> coming at me on the inside of the corner got off the road, and kicked up a
> piece of gravel. I suppose it hit my cheek at close to 60 MPG. I was lucky
> to keep control, and get stopped. It left quite a strawberry bruise.
>
> I still hate full face helmets, though. I think that is one part of the
> equation I'll still have to risk.

I never used one when riding off-road as a teen, but after going over
the handlbars one day and landing on my chin, I wondered if a full-face
helmet would have saved me a nasty cut and scar. I never did wear a
full-face off-road due to the weight and heat, but I've worn one on the
street pretty much since the beginning. And the modern full-face
helmets weigh only about half what my old conventional helmet weighed,
so that is no longer an issue either. They are a little warmer on a hot
day to be sure, but the new ones are pretty well vented.


Matt

Skywise wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:1151811765.345086.45160
> @p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>>>I now take active, positive, and if necessary, aggressive
>>>control of my driving situation. If I sense even the
>>>slightest hint of danger (the list of hints is huge),
>>>then I do something to remove that danger from my presense.
>>>I now have the attitude on the road that I *DO* own it
>>>and to hell with everybody else and to hell with the
>>>laws.
>>
>>I agree with you...to a point.
>>
>>There are many, MANY hints of impending danger when riding, and many
>>little tricks that I've learned to spot it well in advance.
>
>
> Yes, and although one could write them all down for others
> to memorize, experience is the best teacher.

I agree, but I also accept that there are some situations that you just
can't anticipate and avoid. That is just something that we who ride and
fly have to accept.


Matt

Morgans wrote:

> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>
>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>at a red light.
>
>
> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
> are pulling forward.
>
> Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.

Unfortunately, lane splitting seems frowned upon in the eastern US,
unlike in CA and parts of Europe (it seems popular and accepted in
France anyway). Personally, I think it is a great idea and would
encourage more motorcycle use and less fuel consumption. In Taiwan they
even had special "boxes" paintd on the roads at the intersections to
allow the scooters to move to the front and "stage" for the green light.

I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well. The
difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds are
they, and several friends, will shoot back.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Morgans wrote:
>
>> "Skywise" > wrote
>>
>>
>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>at a red light.
>>
>>
>> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
>> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
>> are pulling forward.
>>
>> Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.
>
> Unfortunately, lane splitting seems frowned upon in the eastern US, unlike
> in CA and parts of Europe (it seems popular and accepted in France
> anyway). Personally, I think it is a great idea and would encourage more
> motorcycle use and less fuel consumption. In Taiwan they even had special
> "boxes" paintd on the roads at the intersections to allow the scooters to
> move to the front and "stage" for the green light.
>
> I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well. The
> difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds are
> they, and several friends, will shoot back.
>
> Matt

Yeah, but it is hard to pack "long iron" on a bike... ;-)

KB

In article >,
"Kyle Boatright" > wrote:

> Yeah, but it is hard to pack "long iron" on a bike... ;-)

Ahhh... the famed "Easy Rider Rifle Rack"!

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Morgans wrote:
>
>> "Skywise" > wrote
>>
>>
>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>at a red light.
>>
>>
>> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
>> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
>> are pulling forward.
>>
>> Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.
>
> Unfortunately, lane splitting seems frowned upon in the eastern US, unlike
> in CA and parts of Europe (it seems popular and accepted in France
> anyway). Personally, I think it is a great idea and would encourage more
> motorcycle use and less fuel consumption. In Taiwan they even had special
> "boxes" paintd on the roads at the intersections to allow the scooters to
> move to the front and "stage" for the green light.
>
> I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well.

It is illegal in CO, but very popular and never enforced (with good reason).

> The difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds
> are they, and several friends, will shoot back.

Hopefully with impeccable accuracy against thugs like Jim.

I paid $100 for the bike in 1995. I took it apart and cleaned it five times,
but it continued sticking. Ther are a multitude of other problems with the
bike, so I simply put it aside.

I'm planning to part it out on ebay, so if anyone needs parts for a 1981
CB650 custom, let me know.

"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Steve Foley" > wrote in message
>>
>> I bought a Honda CB650 ten years ago. I stopped riding it three years ago
>> when the float valve stuck and it poured a gallon of gasonline on my leg
>> on the way to work.
>
> Wouldn't it have been easier, simpler, and more sensible to simply fix the
> float valve?
>

On 1 Jul 2006 05:35:24 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

[snip]
>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?


I had a 2002 Harley Dyna Low rider for a while. At 49 it was my first
motorcycle but sold it after 2 years for two reasons.

1. The longer I drove it the better the odds became that some idiot
driver would injure me. I know with more experience I could learn to
reduce the potential dangers, but I have heard of and known too many
guys that have been injured or killed on bikes that I thought it more
prudent to get a boat instead.
Which leads to the second reason.
2. The motorcycle was such a solitary experience for me. My wife never
liked riding on it. And most of the time I was just cruising places on
my own. I did ride a few times with a buddy and was part of a special
ride with another 700 bikes once, but still it always seemed to be
such a solitary endeavor. I can now take another 10 people on my boat,
about 9 more passengers than the bike would carry. It's just more
fun to be able to hang out in the river, drink some beer, do some
tubing, water skiing, swim and generally just lounge around.

As of now, between the boat and sharing the flying with a colleague of
mine, I don't particularly miss the motorcycle.

Kirk

"Skywise" > wrote in message
>
> Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
> scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
> at a red light. ........The upshot is that
> I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.

And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
driver.

in article . com, Jay Honeck
at wrote on 7/1/06 5:35 AM:


> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

I've had a number of friends who rode, I've been a passenger a few times,
and generally enjoyed the experience. And obviously I respect everyone's
right to pursue it.

But as I sit typing this on a peaceful Sunday morning in a quiet, suburban
neighborhood, I feel it is incumbent upon me to remind you all of something:
a lot of you are really LOUD. How do I know when the guy five streets over
has decided to go riding? Because I have ears.

The next time some motorist behaves rudely or callously towards
you--behavior which I certainly do not condone, by the way--consider that
their nerves may be on edge from lack of sleep, or having the peace of a
Sunday morning shattered. As I just did in the middle of typing this.

Kyle Boatright wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Morgans wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Skywise" > wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>>at a red light.
>>>
>>>
>>>Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
>>>road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
>>>are pulling forward.
>>>
>>>Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.
>>
>>Unfortunately, lane splitting seems frowned upon in the eastern US, unlike
>>in CA and parts of Europe (it seems popular and accepted in France
>>anyway). Personally, I think it is a great idea and would encourage more
>>motorcycle use and less fuel consumption. In Taiwan they even had special
>>"boxes" paintd on the roads at the intersections to allow the scooters to
>>move to the front and "stage" for the green light.
>>
>>I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well. The
>>difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds are
>>they, and several friends, will shoot back.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> Yeah, but it is hard to pack "long iron" on a bike... ;-)

No, but I can pack my "big iron" (Super Blackhawk) just fine. Remember
the old Marty Robbins song... :-)

Matt

Matt Barrow wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Morgans wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Skywise" > wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>>at a red light.
>>>
>>>
>>>Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
>>>road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
>>>are pulling forward.
>>>
>>>Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.
>>
>>Unfortunately, lane splitting seems frowned upon in the eastern US, unlike
>>in CA and parts of Europe (it seems popular and accepted in France
>>anyway). Personally, I think it is a great idea and would encourage more
>>motorcycle use and less fuel consumption. In Taiwan they even had special
>>"boxes" paintd on the roads at the intersections to allow the scooters to
>>move to the front and "stage" for the green light.
>>
>>I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well.
>
>
> It is illegal in CO, but very popular and never enforced (with good reason).
>
>
>> The difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds
>>are they, and several friends, will shoot back.
>
>
> Hopefully with impeccable accuracy against thugs like Jim.

Well, I've killed 5 woodchucks this year on my property using 5 shots.

Matt

FlipSide wrote:

> On 1 Jul 2006 05:35:24 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
>
> I had a 2002 Harley Dyna Low rider for a while. At 49 it was my first
> motorcycle but sold it after 2 years for two reasons.
>
> 1. The longer I drove it the better the odds became that some idiot
> driver would injure me. I know with more experience I could learn to
> reduce the potential dangers, but I have heard of and known too many
> guys that have been injured or killed on bikes that I thought it more
> prudent to get a boat instead.

Actually, and we had a long thread recently about this on one of the
newsgroups, but maybe not his one, the probability does NOT change based
on the past.


> Which leads to the second reason.
> 2. The motorcycle was such a solitary experience for me. My wife never
> liked riding on it. And most of the time I was just cruising places on
> my own. I did ride a few times with a buddy and was part of a special
> ride with another 700 bikes once, but still it always seemed to be
> such a solitary endeavor. I can now take another 10 people on my boat,
> about 9 more passengers than the bike would carry. It's just more
> fun to be able to hang out in the river, drink some beer, do some
> tubing, water skiing, swim and generally just lounge around.

I actually like riding alone, but the good thing is that my wife likes
to ride, fly and shoot, even though she had done none of these before
meeting me. She knew that I was doing all of these before we got
married and wasn't likely to give up any of them. :-)


> As of now, between the boat and sharing the flying with a colleague of
> mine, I don't particularly miss the motorcycle.

Yes, I know I have too many passions and it is hard now with kids and
such to keep up with all of them. That is one reason I haven't been in
a big hurry to get another motorcycle, although I do miss riding a lot.


Matt

John Gaquin wrote:

> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>
>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>>I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>
>
> And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
> car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
> high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
> driver.

Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.
People should be rewarded for saving fuel, especially when it doesn't
harm others. Allowing motorcycles to lane split doesn't really have any
significant adverse impact on the cars stuck in the line so what is the
harm assuming it is done prudently and safely? I'm not talking about
riding 60 MPH between a closely spaced line of cars, but most
interstates provide at least 6' between cars and that is plenty for a
motorcyle to ride in at 15-20 MPH.


Matt

Philip S. wrote:

> in article . com, Jay Honeck
> at wrote on 7/1/06 5:35 AM:
>
>
>
>>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
>
>
> I've had a number of friends who rode, I've been a passenger a few times,
> and generally enjoyed the experience. And obviously I respect everyone's
> right to pursue it.
>
> But as I sit typing this on a peaceful Sunday morning in a quiet, suburban
> neighborhood, I feel it is incumbent upon me to remind you all of something:
> a lot of you are really LOUD. How do I know when the guy five streets over
> has decided to go riding? Because I have ears.
>
> The next time some motorist behaves rudely or callously towards
> you--behavior which I certainly do not condone, by the way--consider that
> their nerves may be on edge from lack of sleep, or having the peace of a
> Sunday morning shattered. As I just did in the middle of typing this.

I agree. People, mostly Harley riders, who run loud pipes are just
inconsiderate slobs. There is simply no excuse for it.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>
>> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>

>>>snip>>>
>>>
>>>I think it is both illegal as well as frowned on in PA as well. The
>>>difference here though is that if you shoot at a motorcyclist odds are
>>>they, and several friends, will shoot back.
>>>
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>> Yeah, but it is hard to pack "long iron" on a bike... ;-)
>
> No, but I can pack my "big iron" (Super Blackhawk) just fine. Remember
> the old Marty Robbins song... :-)
>
> Matt

Dunno Marty Robbins, but I get a laugh whenever I hear "Uneasy Rider" by
Charlie Daniels.

KB

On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 12:28:12 -0400, "John Gaquin"
> wrote:

>
>"Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>> Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>> scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>> at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>> I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>
>And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
>car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
>high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
>driver.
>

But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
of them? Too many automobile drivers are in such a hurry. A typical
traffic light will only delay you, at the most, by 60 seconds. There
are exceptions but usually it doesn't take longer than that and the
driver is on his way again. I always wonder...what's the rush these
days?

"Philip S." > wrote
>
> I've had a number of friends who rode, I've been a passenger a few times,
> and generally enjoyed the experience.

Yep, and riding is also a skill, also.

I was riding passenger with a friend, while in college. We would go out in
the late night, and just start driving on back roads, no map, and not paying
too much attention to where we were going; toss a coin to decide which way
to turn at an intersection. The goal was to get lost, and then try to
figure out how to get back home.

One night while driving serenely along on a country road, not going
particularly fast, when we went up over a small rise, and before we knew it,
the road disappeared. When it quickly re-appeared, it had taken a pretty
sharp left hand turn. Oh SH^T!!!

There was no time to get slowed enough to make the turn, and we both knew
it. There was no ditch, and a nice smooth looking yard, (with plenty of
dew) so we straightened up, and went out through the yard. I knew that if
we had a chance of not taking a spill, I had better not squirm around and
upset the balance. I sat still like a rock (I was holding on grab bars, and
not onto the driver) and out across the yard we went, slowing as fast as was
possible, until we were slow enough to get back onto the road.

We knew where we were by then (pretty much) so we continued back home,
neither of us saying a word, but knowing what bullet we had both dodged.
Once we got home, and shut off the engine and dismounted., the driver said,
"Jim, I want to thank you for being the perfect rider. If you would have
panicked back there, I would not have been able to control the bike, and we
would be in the hospital, right now."

"Thanks," I said. "I knew what I had to do, even though I thought we were
going down, for sure."

Another lesson or two learned. One, brief your riders on the importance of
being a "still" rider, and two, if you can not see the direction of the
road, slow down before you get to where the road disappears. <g>
--
Jim in NC

<FlipSide> wrote

> But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
> impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
> of them?

It is all about playing by the rules, and the ones who think that they are
better than everyone else, and cutting to the front.

He has no more right than I do to be at the front of the line. Period.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
> <FlipSide> wrote
>
>
>>But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
>>impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
>>of them?
>
>
> It is all about playing by the rules, and the ones who think that they are
> better than everyone else, and cutting to the front.
>
> He has no more right than I do to be at the front of the line. Period.

I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.
It works fine in most of the rest of the world.

It isn't about rights. Driving isn't a right. I suppose you also park
in handicap spots as those handicapped folks don't have any more rights
than you do either right? And I suppose you drive solo in the car pool
lane as well.

Matt

<snip>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
I am a near pilot, working on the checkride. Have never owned a motorcycle,
but have ridden off-road and street bikes many times.

I was going to buy my first bike this summer, a Yamaha FZ6, but the
insurance cost kept me from making the purchase. I am in the processes of
looking at different bikes and trying to decide if I still want to buy a
bike, or use the money to buy a boat...

John

Jay Honeck wrote:


>
> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle?
Don't even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.

"Newps" > wrote

> Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
> vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle? Don't
> even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.

You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and choose which
battles to fight. One of those may not be worth fighting, someday.
--
Jim in NC

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Having just returned from a 3-day motorcycle camping trip, the riding
> experience is once again fresh in my mind. (Alas, I don't get to ride
> much nowadays; but there was a time when Mary and I rode
> coast-to-coast...)
>


I started riding dirt bikes at 55 years young and owned three.
the last was a Yamaha 175. I rode for 10 years and decided I
would quit while I was ahead.Always wanted a Harley road
bike but having been run into by hairbrain drivers twice I decided
against it.I'll stick with my Cessna.

Bob Barker N8749S

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:TKUpg.141
>
> Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in

Yup. Keep telling yourself that.

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
>
> I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.

And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you consider
stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide by the rules.

Morgans wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote
>
>
>>Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
>>vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle? Don't
>>even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.
>
>
> You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and choose which
> battles to fight. One of those may not be worth fighting, someday.

I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any parent.
But these are absolutes.

"Newps" > wrote

> I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any parent.
> But these are absolutes.

One day, they will be out from under your control. If you forbid them, they
may very likely go out and do what you forbade.

That is what I did, regarding the bike issue.

Now, 25 years later, they think I still came out OK. <g>

Really, I encourage you to examine what you forbid, and why. Giving them
good values, and letting them make their own decisions at an appropriate
age, is in my opinion, a far better course to take.
--
Jim in NC

> Absolutely, 100% agree. Motorcyclists with straight pipes are no
> better than truckers who use their "jake brakes" around town -- they're
> inconsiderate morons.
>
> Personally, I would support the death penalty for both offenses -- but
> I seem to be in the minority.

This complaint sounds vaguely familiar.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article >,
"John Gaquin" > wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
> >
> > I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.
>
> And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you consider
> stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide by the rules.

otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
motorcycle riders.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Morgans wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote
>
>
>>I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any parent.
>>But these are absolutes.
>
>
> One day, they will be out from under your control.

These are not lifelong rules, just rules while they live here.



>
> That is what I did, regarding the bike issue.

A teenager has zero business riding a motorcycle in traffic.

"Bob Noel" > wrote

> otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
> than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
> lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
> motorcycle riders.

That is nothing but a bunch of bull. He does it because he can get away
with it. The other (because it is safer) is just an attempt at
justification.

It won't be safer when someone pulls a gun on him, or opens a door right as
he is coming. Both are real possibilities. Who do you think would pay for
the damage to the door, when the ticket is written? Not the person in the
car, no doubt.

When riding in a pack of cars, there is very little danger. The highest
danger (anytime) is from someone coming at you turning left into your path,
or pulling onto the road into your path. If you are following relatively
close to the car in front of you, you are shielded from that. The next most
common danger is from someone changing lanes into you. If you speed up or
slow down slightly so you are not directly beside the other car beside you,
that danger is not an issue, and you are still shielded from the left
turning driver.

By speeding ahead of the pack, a rider has exposed himself to the danger of
someone turning left into your path. The car driver will likely be looking
at the pack of cars coming, and want to be in a hurry to turn before they
get there, and look right past you and turn right into you.

Sorry, but the argument for white liners does not hold water. They are on
the same level as straight pipes, or people who park in handicap spaces when
they have no need for it. They are abusing other people, for their own self
serving principles.
--
Jim in NC

"Newps" > wrote

> A teenager has zero business riding a motorcycle in traffic.

Why? What difference is the danger to a teenager, or a 22 year old?
--
Jim in NC

In article >,
Morgans > wrote:
>
><FlipSide> wrote
>
>> But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
>> impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
>> of them?
>
>It is all about playing by the rules, and the ones who think that they are
>better than everyone else, and cutting to the front.

The rules depend on the location. In CA, lane splitting is legal,
so the motorcyclist who passes cars at a light is following the
rules. Even the motorcycle cops in CA lane split.

The only ones who **** me off are the ones that lane split at 70mph+
when traffic is rolling at ~40mph during rush hour. I just hope
they've signed their organ donor cards.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

in article , Jose at
wrote on 7/2/06 5:10 PM:

>> Absolutely, 100% agree. Motorcyclists with straight pipes are no
>> better than truckers who use their "jake brakes" around town -- they're
>> inconsiderate morons.
>>
>> Personally, I would support the death penalty for both offenses -- but
>> I seem to be in the minority.
>
> This complaint sounds vaguely familiar.
>
> Jose

If you're referring to noise complaints about aircraft, there's really no
comparison. It's not like I chose to live next to a motocross track or
something.

"John Clear" > wrote
>
> The rules depend on the location. In CA, lane splitting is legal,
> so the motorcyclist who passes cars at a light is following the
> rules. Even the motorcycle cops in CA lane split.

Cal is strange. (there's a news flash ! <g>) It is illegal to buy acetone,
but you can zoom between cars on a bike.

> The only ones who **** me off are the ones that lane split at 70mph+
> when traffic is rolling at ~40mph during rush hour. I just hope
> they've signed their organ donor cards.

Also, the ones that see a closed land causing traffic to back up, but go
clear to the front, and cut in at the last moment, causing people to slam on
their brakes, and cause traffic to back up, even more.

If everyone would slow down 10 MPH (if it is backing up) and decrease the
following distance, and not slam on their brakes, everyone would move right
on through with minimal delay.

I'll be the one out beside the others, forming the rolling roadblock, to
keep ALL of the traffic moving at a good speed.

I have seen people getting pulled for running up and cutting in, BTW, so
don't anyone say it is legal. I laughed my A^S off, BTW!

Man, I have to get my blood pressure down, and get off my soapbox, today.
I'll try to shut up, now. <g>
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" > wrote in :

>
> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>> Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>> scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>> at a red light.
>
> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
> are pulling forward.
>
> Don't do that crap. Be a little more patient.

And it's ass holes on the road like you who have forced me
to take the measures I do. You are a perfect example of
"The Problem".

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Morgans wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote
>
>
>>Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
>>vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle? Don't
>>even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.
>
>
> You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and choose which
> battles to fight. One of those may not be worth fighting, someday.

Very true. I agree though with the tattoos and ear rings, but banning
motorcycles is simply crossing the line. :-)


Matt

Matt Whiting > wrote in news:%EPpg.131$Pa.18143
@news1.epix.net:

> Skywise wrote:
<Snipola>

>> Yes, and although one could write them all down for others
>> to memorize, experience is the best teacher.
>
> I agree, but I also accept that there are some situations that you just
> can't anticipate and avoid. That is just something that we who ride and
> fly have to accept.

I'm reminded of somethign Donald Rumsfled said about intelligence.
He said there's three kind's of intelligence (information). There's
what you know you know, what you know you don't know, and what you
don't know that you don't know. It's the third one that causes the
problems.

I've also heard it said many times by my father who was a truck
driver and DOT certified safety officer for his company, "Always
prepare for the unexpected."

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Newps wrote:

>
>
> Morgans wrote:
>
>> "Newps" > wrote
>>
>>
>>> Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
>>> vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle?
>>> Don't even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.
>>
>>
>>
>> You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and choose
>> which battles to fight. One of those may not be worth fighting, someday.
>
>
> I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any parent.
> But these are absolutes.

And absolutes only make teens try absolutely as hard as possible to get
around them. Your kids will make sure now to get some motorcycle time
with friends or friends of friends. I'm going to make sure my son
learns to ride from me in conditions I can control. I've seen the
result of kids learning from other kids. It isn't pretty.


Matt

"John Gaquin" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>> Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>> scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>> at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>> I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>
> And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
> car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
> high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
> driver.

I said it to Morgans, and I'll say it here. It's because of
ass holes on the road that get ****ed at other drivers for
nothing that have caused me to do what I do.

Believe me, I was starting to go down that road myself. I was
starting to take off people's mirrors and kick their doors
whenever I was slighted on the road. Would you rather I go
back to doing that instead of driving the way I do now? hmmmm?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

John Gaquin wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
>
>>I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.
>
>
> And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you consider
> stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide by the rules.

I never said that or even hinted at it. Have you always had this
problem with reading comprehension?

Matt

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>But as I sit typing this on a peaceful Sunday morning in a quiet, suburban
>>neighborhood, I feel it is incumbent upon me to remind you all of something:
>>a lot of you are really LOUD. How do I know when the guy five streets over
>>has decided to go riding? Because I have ears.
>>
>>The next time some motorist behaves rudely or callously towards
>>you--behavior which I certainly do not condone, by the way--consider that
>>their nerves may be on edge from lack of sleep, or having the peace of a
>>Sunday morning shattered. As I just did in the middle of typing this.
>
>
> Absolutely, 100% agree. Motorcyclists with straight pipes are no
> better than truckers who use their "jake brakes" around town -- they're
> inconsiderate morons.
>
> Personally, I would support the death penalty for both offenses -- but
> I seem to be in the minority.

I would, but only for the second offense. I'd use flogging for the
first offense. :-)

Matt

Bob Noel wrote:

> In article >,
> "John Gaquin" > wrote:
>
>
>>"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
>>
>>>I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.
>>
>>And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you consider
>>stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide by the rules.
>
>
> otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
> than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
> lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
> motorcycle riders.

Well, first of all, I never said that I disregard this rule or any
other. Read again what I wrote. I said I thought the rule was stupid.
I've never lane split myself and would only do so where it is
permitted. However, I do think the rule prohibiting lane splitting is
stupid.

Matt

Matt Whiting > wrote in
:

> John Gaquin wrote:
>
>> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>>>I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>>
>>
>> And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake
>> 50-100 car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they
>> encounter. That's high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire
>> of a responsible driver.
>
> Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
> many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
> splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.

It's has it's pro's and con's. There's a time to do it, and a
time to refrain. There are many times I don't do it because of
an increased risk. I particularly hate starting down the line
and having the light turn green before I get to the front.
Drivers have this awful habit of swerving back and forth as
they accelerate.

I'd like to also ad that I have heard from multiple sources,
including a few cops, that white lining is encouraged for
motorcycle officers. Supposedly it has been found to be
safer than staying back and getting squished between the car
in front and the drunk behind that doesn't see the stopped
traffic.



> People should be rewarded for saving fuel, especially when it doesn't
> harm others. Allowing motorcycles to lane split doesn't really have any
> significant adverse impact on the cars stuck in the line so what is the
> harm assuming it is done prudently and safely? I'm not talking about
> riding 60 MPH between a closely spaced line of cars, but most
> interstates provide at least 6' between cars and that is plenty for a
> motorcyle to ride in at 15-20 MPH.

This is an exampel of when white lining should not be done.
Except on rare occasion, my personal rule of thumb is if I
can maintain 4th gear on the freeway, I go with the flow.
And if I do whiteline on the freeway, I keep it to no more
than 10mph faster than traffic. That way if something happens,
like the idiot who decudes to change lanes without signaling
or looking - or the asshole who doesn't liek motorcyclists
whitelining - I only have to lose 5-10 mph to avoid an
incident.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Newps wrote:

>
>
> Morgans wrote:
>
>> "Newps" > wrote
>>
>>
>>> I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any
>>> parent. But these are absolutes.
>>
>>
>>
>> One day, they will be out from under your control.
>
>
> These are not lifelong rules, just rules while they live here.

And this is one rule they will be sure to break ... while still living
with you. And very likely get hurt in the process as they'll break it
with a bunch of friends rather than riding under your direct
supervision. But as the TV commercial used to say, "You make the call."


>
>
>>
>> That is what I did, regarding the bike issue.
>
>
> A teenager has zero business riding a motorcycle in traffic.

I disagree completely. I started riding on the street as soon as I got
my license at 16. However, I'd ridden for close to 6 years off-road and
that is what I'd recommend for any youngster that has a interest in
riding. You can wreck with much less chance of a serious injury and you
don't have to worry about a car running over you after you fall.

Matt

Morgans wrote:

> "Bob Noel" > wrote
>
>
>>otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
>>than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
>>lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
>>motorcycle riders.
>
>
> That is nothing but a bunch of bull. He does it because he can get away
> with it. The other (because it is safer) is just an attempt at
> justification.

I'm amazed at how many of you can't read.

Matt

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> <FlipSide> wrote
>
>> But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
>> impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
>> of them?
>
> It is all about playing by the rules, and the ones who think that they
> are better than everyone else, and cutting to the front.
>
> He has no more right than I do to be at the front of the line. Period.

When everybody else starts obeying the rules and stops
endangering my well being while on the road, then we'll
talk.

I obeyed the rules for the first 10 years or so of driving
and all it got me was grief and frustration at nearly
being killed every couple miles because of the phucktards
that have no business behind the wheel.

My actions are in reaction to what other people do on the
road. I tried playing mr. niceguy. Sorry, No more.

Like I said in another post just now, what I do is a much
better solution than what I was starting to do. If I had
continued down the path I was, I'm sure I'd be in jail
by now.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

In article >, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

> >>>I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.
> >>
> >>And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you
> >>consider
> >>stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide by the
> >>rules.
> >
> > otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
> > than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
> > lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
> > motorcycle riders.
>
> Well, first of all, I never said that I disregard this rule or any
> other. Read again what I wrote. I said I thought the rule was stupid.
> I've never lane split myself and would only do so where it is
> permitted. However, I do think the rule prohibiting lane splitting is
> stupid.

ok. I lost track of who said what. I was thinking of Skywise's post
on lane splitting or white lining or whatever it's called. Primarily
I was responding to the post claiming that they knew what the
motivation for the practice. I did not mean to imply that anyone
was disregarding a rule.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Bob Noel > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> "John Gaquin" > wrote:
>
>> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
>> >
>> > I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be
>> > changed.
>>
>> And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you
>> consider stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide
>> by the rules.
>
> otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more
> important than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer.
> Let's not lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major
> risk for motorcycle riders.

Thank you!!!! I do this because I have founf through empirical
evidence that it is safer.

Remember, I've been doing this for almost 20 years now. I've
had lots of time to try different tactics.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Skywise wrote:

> Matt Whiting > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>John Gaquin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Skywise" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>>at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>>>>I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>>>
>>>
>>>And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake
>>>50-100 car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they
>>>encounter. That's high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire
>>>of a responsible driver.
>>
>>Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
>>many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
>>splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.
>
>
> It's has it's pro's and con's. There's a time to do it, and a
> time to refrain. There are many times I don't do it because of
> an increased risk. I particularly hate starting down the line
> and having the light turn green before I get to the front.
> Drivers have this awful habit of swerving back and forth as
> they accelerate.
>
> I'd like to also ad that I have heard from multiple sources,
> including a few cops, that white lining is encouraged for
> motorcycle officers. Supposedly it has been found to be
> safer than staying back and getting squished between the car
> in front and the drunk behind that doesn't see the stopped
> traffic.
>
>
>
>
>> People should be rewarded for saving fuel, especially when it doesn't
>>harm others. Allowing motorcycles to lane split doesn't really have any
>>significant adverse impact on the cars stuck in the line so what is the
>>harm assuming it is done prudently and safely? I'm not talking about
>>riding 60 MPH between a closely spaced line of cars, but most
>>interstates provide at least 6' between cars and that is plenty for a
>>motorcyle to ride in at 15-20 MPH.
>
>
> This is an exampel of when white lining should not be done.
> Except on rare occasion, my personal rule of thumb is if I
> can maintain 4th gear on the freeway, I go with the flow.
> And if I do whiteline on the freeway, I keep it to no more
> than 10mph faster than traffic. That way if something happens,
> like the idiot who decudes to change lanes without signaling
> or looking - or the asshole who doesn't liek motorcyclists
> whitelining - I only have to lose 5-10 mph to avoid an
> incident.

I was talking about riding in stopped traffic.

Matt

"Skywise" > wrote

> I'm reminded of somethign Donald Rumsfled said about intelligence.
> He said there's three kind's of intelligence (information). There's
> what you know you know, what you know you don't know, and what you
> don't know that you don't know. It's the third one that causes the
> problems.

Guess your problem is that you are only smart enough to have a heartbeat
while driving, and nothing more. You can tell from the reaction here, that
nearly everyone thinks that what you are doing is not safe. Where does that
put you? Are you the only sane one, and the rest of the world is crazy?
That is usually not the case.

Continue as you like. In states where it is legal, continue to ride between
cars. In the states where it is not legal, don't drive by me.

Your actions are not going to save you. They will catch up to you, some
day, somewhere.

Drive sanely, and be prepared for the unexpected, and you will be more safe,
than what you are doing. Other people are not expecting you coming past
them, and they *may* not be expecting the unexpected, and do something to
nail you.
--
Jim in NC

In article >, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

> >>otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more important
> >>than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer. Let's not
> >>lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major risk for
> >>motorcycle riders.
> >
> > That is nothing but a bunch of bull. He does it because he can get away
> > with it. The other (because it is safer) is just an attempt at
> > justification.
>
> I'm amazed at how many of you can't read.

Reading isn't really the problem. It more an apparent inability to understand
that there can be many possible motivations for a behavior.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

"Philip S." > wrote


> If you're referring to noise complaints about aircraft, there's really no
> comparison. It's not like I chose to live next to a motocross track or
> something.


I'm pretty sure that he is comparing Jake brakes on trucks and straight
pipes on motorcycles.

Do you know what Jake brakes are?
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bob Noel" > wrote
>
>> otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more
>> important than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer.
>> Let's not lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major
>> risk for motorcycle riders.
>
> That is nothing but a bunch of bull. He does it because he can get away
> with it. The other (because it is safer) is just an attempt at
> justification.

Like I said, if everybody else drove properly I would not
feel the need to do what I do.

You seem to be under the impression that I do this all the
time every time. I don't. I use white lining tactfully,
and never do if it may endanger others. I'm not some speed
freak who thinks I'm God's gift to the road and everyone
else can eat my shorts. No, I grew out of that stage a
long time ago, and I was never as afflicted as 90% of the
population with that disease.

As for the rest of yuor post, you also seem to be under
the impression that I white line amongst moving traffic.
Although I have done this, I don't do it often and only
with good reason. As I stated in my post, I try to do
this only when traffic is stopped at a light.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Newps wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Morgans wrote:
>>
>>> "Newps" > wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
>>>> vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum. Motorcycle?
>>>> Don't even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and choose
>>> which battles to fight. One of those may not be worth fighting,
>>> someday.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any
>> parent. But these are absolutes.
>
>
> And absolutes only make teens try absolutely as hard as possible to get
> around them.

Actually that's not the case. My kids ridicule kids with tattoos. They
see the idiot teenage motorcycle drivers and know that's why they won't
be on one. The rules make sense and they can see that. It's not even a
battle.

(John Clear) wrote in
:

> In article >,
> Morgans > wrote:
>>
>><FlipSide> wrote
>>
>>> But isn't the reason those drivers get upset is because they are
>>> impatient, in a hurry and jealous that the motorcyclist is now ahead
>>> of them?
>>
>>It is all about playing by the rules, and the ones who think that they
>>are better than everyone else, and cutting to the front.
>
> The rules depend on the location. In CA, lane splitting is legal,
> so the motorcyclist who passes cars at a light is following the
> rules. Even the motorcycle cops in CA lane split.
>
> The only ones who **** me off are the ones that lane split at 70mph+
> when traffic is rolling at ~40mph during rush hour. I just hope
> they've signed their organ donor cards.

I agree. My goal is to be goign no more than 5-10mph faster than
the mean flow of traffic. This means that if something happend
unexpectedly, I only need to lose that 5-10 mph.

See, I don't do this stuff with reckless abandon like some
young testosterone driven buck in his flip-flops and shorts
while showing off to his girlfriend on the back that he can
do wheelies at 80mph on his brand new rice burner. :)

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Morgans" > wrote in news:Dd_pg.3581$YN4.1028
@fe03.lga:

>
> "John Clear" > wrote
>>
>> The rules depend on the location. In CA, lane splitting is legal,
>> so the motorcyclist who passes cars at a light is following the
>> rules. Even the motorcycle cops in CA lane split.
>
> Cal is strange. (there's a news flash ! <g>) It is illegal to buy acetone,
> but you can zoom between cars on a bike.

Really? I can go down to my local Home Depot and by acetone
by the gallon.

<Snipola>
> I'll be the one out beside the others, forming the rolling roadblock, to
> keep ALL of the traffic moving at a good speed.

Geee...what an ass. You might get run off the road or shot
at for doing that. And here I'm the bad guy for whitelining,
which does not interfere with other's driving.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Newps wrote:
>
>
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Newps wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Morgans wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Newps" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any
>>>>> road vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum.
>>>>> Motorcycle? Don't even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You may someday learn that parenting sometimes has to pick and
>>>> choose which battles to fight. One of those may not be worth
>>>> fighting, someday.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm well aware of that and make those decisions daily, like any
>>> parent. But these are absolutes.
>>
>>
>>
>> And absolutes only make teens try absolutely as hard as possible to
>> get around them.
>
>
> Actually that's not the case. My kids ridicule kids with tattoos. They
> see the idiot teenage motorcycle drivers and know that's why they won't
> be on one. The rules make sense and they can see that. It's not even a
> battle.

If your kids have no desire to ride a motorcycle, then the rule makes
sense, but is also irrelevant. If your kids have a desire to ride, then
it makes no sense and would be relevant and would be ignored. I had a
strong desire to ride from a very young age. I learned off-road on a
small minibike and worked my way up slowly. I bought a street bike when
I turned 16 and have been riding, safely, ever since and that was more
than 30 years ago.

My kids have never shown any interest in flying so I could ban them from
that and they wouldn't give a rats behind. However, if I banned them
from using IM or similar, they'd just use it at friends homes and I'd
likely never know. I'd rather they use it under my supervision where I
can point out the dangers in addition to the benefits.

We all have our own philosophies.


Matt

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
ups.com:

>> But as I sit typing this on a peaceful Sunday morning in a quiet,
>> suburban neighborhood, I feel it is incumbent upon me to remind you all
>> of something: a lot of you are really LOUD. How do I know when the guy
>> five streets over has decided to go riding? Because I have ears.
>>
>> The next time some motorist behaves rudely or callously towards
>> you--behavior which I certainly do not condone, by the way--consider
>> that their nerves may be on edge from lack of sleep, or having the
>> peace of a Sunday morning shattered. As I just did in the middle of
>> typing this.
>
> Absolutely, 100% agree. Motorcyclists with straight pipes are no
> better than truckers who use their "jake brakes" around town -- they're
> inconsiderate morons.
>
> Personally, I would support the death penalty for both offenses -- but
> I seem to be in the minority.

What about your loud plane?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On 1 Jul 2006 05:35:24 -0700, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

snip

>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

Yes & yes.

Trying to explain to someone why you need to ride (or need to fly) is
semi-pointless.

If they've been there, you don't need to explain it. If they haven't,
you can't explain it.

First tandem skydiving lesson I ever took, the instructor was
surprised that I appeared to me calm, cool, and collected all the way
down.

I explained that falling toward the surface of the earth @ 120mph from
a mile up is pretty tame compared to travelling horizontally across it
@ 140mph on 2 wheels.

Currently ride a 40 hp "thumper". I can still be stupid, but I can't
be really stupid.

TC

"Skywise" > wrote in message
>
> Believe me, I was starting to go down that road myself. I was
> starting to take off people's mirrors and kick their doors
> whenever I was slighted on the road. Would you rather I go
> back to doing that instead of driving the way I do now? hmmmm?

I would "rather" nothing at all. You can drive as you want, but you're
generating your own antagonists as you do. Are the only available options
selfish anarchy or unbridled road rage? That's just juvenile
rationalization for picking one bad choice over another. The adult choice
is to pay attention, avoid the circumstances that lead to accidents, and
show a little patience and maturity. You're not the only one with
experience here. I virtually lived on my bikes for about eight years,
year-round locally (winter and summer) and six cross-country trips, and I
never had an accident, never had a run-in with a car or truck driver, and
never had to resort to kicking doors or bashing mirrors, either. Your
"I-only-drive-this-way-because-car-drivers-force-me-to" rationale carries no
weight in this corner.

Morgans wrote:

> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
> are pulling forward.

Interesting. As one who moved to NC last year (from CA, after 30+ years
there), I find the traffic here pretty relaxed in comparison. The
percentage of combative types is way lower (though they do exist). I do
think that the overall driver skill level is lower here - and I do see
a lot of really stupid accidents in NC (like totally avoidable by
anyone on the ball). One thing I find highly amusing is that, whenever
a few snowflakes fall in the winter, they close the schools and just
about averybody disappears.

I had a direct comparison recently - spent a few days in the LA basin
on business. It was definitely life in the fast lane again (complete
with road rage encounters).

BTW - to answer the original questions, yes and yes. I started flying
in 1967 and bought my first bike in 1970 (would have done so sooner but
for parental opposition, not to mention lack of funding). Have been
doing both more or less continuously since.

David Johnson

>> Here in NC, your are liable to get a bullet in your ass, or run off the
>> road, doing that crap. I might be one of the ones to run you off, as you
>> are pulling forward.
>
> Interesting. As one who moved to NC last year (from CA, after 30+ years
> there), I find the traffic here pretty relaxed in comparison.

Yep. It is true; everything is a bit slower in the south.

>The
> percentage of combative types is way lower (though they do exist).

It isn't the combative type that I am talking about. It isn't me that has a
gun in the car, ready to use. Have no doubt, the redneck folk DO have guns
loaded, in the car, and occasionally do threaten with them, or use them.

> I do
> think that the overall driver skill level is lower here - and I do see
> a lot of really stupid accidents in NC (like totally avoidable by
> anyone on the ball). One thing I find highly amusing is that, whenever
> a few snowflakes fall in the winter, they close the schools and just
> about averybody disappears.

Let me tell you why that is.

I also used to drive school bus, as a substitute driver. There are a lot of
gravel roads in the mountain, that never get sunshine on them, because they
are cut out of the side of a steep hill. Any snow sticks on them very
quickly. Most often, they are slanted for easy drainage, towards the
outside of the corner, to a drop-off. At the edge of the road, there is
almost always no shoulder, and a hundred foot (or more) drop-off, with NO
guard-rail. None. Put some very wet snow on this road, drive on it to pack
it down, get colder because the cold front just came through that brought
this snow, and what do you have? ICE! A sheet of it, and since it is on
the north side of the hill, the sun isn't going to melt it!

How many school busses (or young unexperienced drivers) do you think the
superentendent of the school would accept going off the embankment? Zero is
the correct answer, of course.

Also, the snow is different, where I live in NC. I grew up on the shores of
Lake Erie, so snow was no stranger to me, into my mid 20's. 3 to 6 inches,
no problem. Usually kind of dry, fair traction. Temp, far enough below
freezing, that it has a fairly low moisture content, usually.

Here, the snow usually follows freezing rain, and falling temperatures. You
end up with a quarter inch of ice, then some snow on top, for good measure.

I got stopped at a stop sign on a hill, with a very slight incline. VERY
slight, perhaps 1 inch to the foot. I almost could not get going again,
even knowing how to drive on the snow. That was after I was here about 3 or
4 years. I went home that day, knowing that the snow IS (or CAN be)
different, here. Once again, the school transportation people need to
consider that this snow *might* be the snow event that is one of these
special "slippery as snot" snows.

Do the drivers in the south take their caution too far? Without a doubt.
The penalty for being wrong may be severe. Also, you have to consider that
the biggest risk is not *you* getting stuck, but some other yahoo driving
like an idiot sliding into you. Lots of people just stay home. It will be
gone later in the day, or usually the next day, but at the most 3 days, so
there is no need to be impatient and get out on the battlefield. Besides,
you allready went to the store to get bread and milk, so what else do you
need? <g> (That is really true. The shelves empty at the first prediction
of snow. God help you, if you really were going to be out of bread or
milk!)

> I had a direct comparison recently - spent a few days in the LA basin
> on business. It was definitely life in the fast lane again (complete
> with road rage encounters).

The larger cities have some road rage, but less than other region's big
cities. You have to be more careful in the smaller cities, 'cuz that is
where the rednecks are going to be hanging out. They attitude is, "it ain't
nothin' for me to whip a man's a^s, or shoot his a^s." Really.

So remember everyone; take it easy out there. Remember, life is too fast,
to worry about going fast "all" of the time! Slow down and enjoy!
--
Jim in NC

"John Gaquin" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>> Believe me, I was starting to go down that road myself. I was
>> starting to take off people's mirrors and kick their doors
>> whenever I was slighted on the road. Would you rather I go
>> back to doing that instead of driving the way I do now? hmmmm?
>
> I would "rather" nothing at all. You can drive as you want, but you're
> generating your own antagonists as you do.

I have had no problems since I adopted my current driving style.


> Are the only available options
> selfish anarchy or unbridled road rage? That's just juvenile
> rationalization for picking one bad choice over another.

Is it? You seem to be in the same vein as Morgans, and not
listening to what I am saying. I do what I do because of
what others do on the road. When I started riding, I played
it 'safe'. I also had a lot of close calls. I had people
who would actually try to run me off the road for what
reason, I have no idea. But since I've adopted my current
driving style, I no longer have these problems.


> The adult choice
> is to pay attention, avoid the circumstances that lead to accidents,

Which is EXACTLY what my current driving style accomplishes.
I remove myself from those situations which experience has
taught me are dangerous ones to be in.


> and
> show a little patience and maturity.

Patience? For idiots who by their inability to drive are
endangering my life? You want me to have patience?!?! HA!

Maturity? Well, let's see here. I could either blow my
top and start beating the **** out of people when they
nearly kill me on the road. or....

I could just drive in a way that removes me from nearly
all chance of encountering such situations. This is the
choice I made.

Which is the more mature option?



> You're not the only one with
> experience here. I virtually lived on my bikes for about eight years,

19+ years riding, 18+ of which on the streets and freeways
of Los Angelese and Orange counties. For about half those
years my bike was my primary transportation for work.

I'll bet your experiences are different than mine, unless
all your riding has been in the same area I've been riding.



> year-round locally (winter and summer) and six cross-country trips, and
> I never had an accident, never had a run-in with a car or truck driver,
> and never had to resort to kicking doors or bashing mirrors, either.
> Your "I-only-drive-this-way-because-car-drivers-force-me-to" rationale
> carries no weight in this corner.

Then get out of MY corner. :)

You see. I act like this because I DON'T WANT OT ****ING DIE BECAUSE
OF SOME **** HEAD THAT DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO DRIVE.

Get it? :)

I've been a very happy rider since I changed my driving style. I
have so few 'incidents' any more because of it, that when something
does happen I just shrug it off and drive away.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Skywise" > wrote

> Really? I can go down to my local Home Depot and by acetone
> by the gallon.

I was using that as a speaking point, that many things are illegal in CA,
because they "are suspected of causing cancer in humans." (at 5,000% the
normal concentration, and injected into the bloodstream, of course <g>)

I didn't know what was allowed or not allowed in La La land, so I just used
something that I'm sure has a great big warning.
--
Jim in NC

"John Gaquin" > wrote

> The adult choice is to pay attention, avoid the circumstances that lead to
> accidents, and show a little patience and maturity. You're not the only
> one with experience here. I virtually lived on my bikes for about eight
> years, year-round locally (winter and summer) and six cross-country trips,
> and I never had an accident, never had a run-in with a car or truck
> driver, and never had to resort to kicking doors or bashing mirrors,
> either. Your "I-only-drive-this-way-because-car-drivers-force-me-to"
> rationale carries no weight in this corner.

HURRAH!!!

Thanks, John. I'm glad that at least a few of us have sensible driving
habits.
--
Jim in NC

Matt W wrote:

>> Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
>> many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
>> splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.

I'm not surprised that Matt feels this way. It fits.
--
Jim in NC

"Newps" > wrote
>
> Actually that's not the case. My kids ridicule kids with tattoos. They
> see the idiot teenage motorcycle drivers and know that's why they won't be
> on one. The rules make sense and they can see that. It's not even a
> battle.

Good for them, if that's what they think.
--
Jim in NC

Matt Whiting > wrote in news:Zd%pg.154$Pa.21963
@news1.epix.net:

<Snipola>
> I was talking about riding in stopped traffic.

I think you have hit on something here.

I have a hunch that when I first mentioned white lining, that
many ASSUMED I meant I was one of those motorcyclists that
fly between moving cars 30 mph faster than the flow of traffic.

But my posted example was of white lining at stoplights, when
traffic is stopped.

There's a big difference between the two situations.

At stop lights, the only reason for other drivers to be upset
is that they're jealous that I happen to be getting ahead of
them in traffic. Fact is, and I've tested this a few times,
I don't gain much time by white lining. But I do gain something
for my safety.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>> I'm reminded of somethign Donald Rumsfled said about intelligence.
>> He said there's three kind's of intelligence (information). There's
>> what you know you know, what you know you don't know, and what you
>> don't know that you don't know. It's the third one that causes the
>> problems.
>
> Guess your problem is that you are only smart enough to have a
> heartbeat
> while driving, and nothing more. You can tell from the reaction here,
> that nearly everyone thinks that what you are doing is not safe. Where
> does that put you? Are you the only sane one, and the rest of the world
> is crazy? That is usually not the case.
>
> Continue as you like. In states where it is legal, continue to ride
> between cars. In the states where it is not legal, don't drive by me.
>
> Your actions are not going to save you. They will catch up to you, some
> day, somewhere.
>
> Drive sanely, and be prepared for the unexpected, and you will be more
> safe, than what you are doing. Other people are not expecting you
> coming past them, and they *may* not be expecting the unexpected, and do
> something to nail you.

Let me ask you, Morgans, how many years have you been riding a
motorcycle in city traffic?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Skywise" > wrote

> You seem to be in the same vein as Morgans, and not
> listening to what I am saying. I do what I do because of
> what others do on the road.

It seems that you did not listen to my post, where I suggested how to drive
safely; more safely than doing what you are doing, and staying in the pack
of traffic. They are like blockers on a "student-body-up-the-middle"
football play.
--
Jim in NC

"Skywise" > wrote

> Let me ask you, Morgans, how many years have you been riding a
> motorcycle in city traffic?

26 years.
--
Jim in NC

Flyingmonk wrote:

> I now only have a basket case ( I took it apart years ago with the
> intention of totally rebuilding it) 197? 750cc Suzuki two stroke
> (shoiuld be very fast vintage cafe racer).

Errr... Make that 500ccSuzuki two stroke. A T500 or a GT 500 Haven't
been in the garage in awhile.

Bryan

"Morgans" > wrote in news:%22qg.519$f36.282
@fe06.lga:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>> Really? I can go down to my local Home Depot and by acetone
>> by the gallon.
>
> I was using that as a speaking point, that many things are illegal in CA,
> because they "are suspected of causing cancer in humans." (at 5,000% the
> normal concentration, and injected into the bloodstream, of course <g>)
>
> I didn't know what was allowed or not allowed in La La land, so I just used
> something that I'm sure has a great big warning.

Actually, what I *DO* find amazing is that on every grocery store
in California there is a sign by the front door saying something
like, "this facility sells products which are known to the state
of california to cause cancer".

My question is, "Why is it still sold then?"

I know, it's not an easy answer. Not all the products have
harmless replacements, or cheap ones. It almost always boils
down to money and greed.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>> You seem to be in the same vein as Morgans, and not
>> listening to what I am saying. I do what I do because of
>> what others do on the road.
>
> It seems that you did not listen to my post, where I suggested how to
> drive safely; more safely than doing what you are doing, and staying in
> the pack of traffic. They are like blockers on a
> "student-body-up-the-middle" football play.

And you are not listening to me. I have found it to be more
dangerous at times to remain in a block of traffic than to
be on my own between blocks of traffic.

I am well aware of the fact that people pulling out of driveways
and such may have a hard time seeing me. Actually, it doesn't
matter. I presume they won't see me no matter what - which has
been demonstrated numerous times. So I take precautions in that
vein as well. One thing I do is to not ride in the right lanes
until I need to for a turn, etc... I also look quite far down
the road, much further than most drivers it seems. Often times
I am braking for something I see up ahead while as many as
several cars ahead of me are still blissfully driving along.

This reminds me, there's been times where I'll be in the back
of a block of traffic, and see nothing coming up behind me. I
often am happy to stay back where I can keep all the idiots in
easy sight in front of me.

Like I've tried to say before, I don't do this stuff ignorantly.
There have been times where I've felt that I can't pay enough
attention (tired, distracted, etc...) so I revert back to so-called
'normal' driving.

But it's always a fluid situation. Something can happen and I
may whitelien for a coupel lights to get away from some obvious
bad drivers, then got back to "kicking back".

I still can't shake this feeling that you have this impression
that I drive like a "madman" all the time, every time. It's
simply not true. I do what the situation warrants and conditions
permit.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Morgans" > wrote in news:Pn2qg.527$f36.158
@fe06.lga:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>> Let me ask you, Morgans, how many years have you been riding a
>> motorcycle in city traffic?
>
> 26 years.

Well, you must live in a city where everyone drives nicely
and looks out for motorcycles, and don't yap on the cell
phone, and don't cut across 3 lanes of traffic in one fell
swoop, and alwyas signal when changing lanes, and always
stop and look both ways before pulling out of a driveway,
and, and wait for you to pass before pulling out because
there's no traffic behind you for blocks, and.....

Hmmmm....Have you never ever white lined?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

> It almost always boils
> down to money and greed.

No, it boils down to an acceptance that life has risk.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Skywise" > wrote
>
> Hmmmm....Have you never ever white lined?

I don't want to come off with a holier-than-thou attitude, but the answer
is- not even once.
--
Jim in NC

"Skywise" > wrote in message
>
> I have had no problems since I adopted my current driving style.
>
>
>...When I started riding, I played
> it 'safe'. I also had a lot of close calls. I had people
> who would actually try to run me off the road for what
> reason, I have no idea.
>
> Patience? For idiots who by their inability to drive are
> endangering my life? You want me to have patience?!?! HA!
>
> Maturity? Well, let's see here. I could either blow my
> top and start beating the **** out of people when they
> nearly kill me on the road. or....

Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from California)
there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless, incompetent,
oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the different
types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world in
quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own driving
style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration and
braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do with
their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other idiots,
and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
circumstances.

BTW, I note your other, seismic related sites. Is your background there
professional or other? I used to be rather involved in that stuff, a long
time ago.

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>
> Nope. In this house the boys have known since day one that any road
> vehicle they are interested has a four wheel minimum.

At Casa d'Barrow; it's four legs minimum...also, no bareback riding and you
better use a saddle blanket if you don't want to give that animal a four
hour rubdown afterwards.

> Motorcycle? Don't even ask. Same goes for tattoos and earrings.

Me talking to daughter: So, did you date that football player that asked you
out?
Daughter: Hell, no; he wears an earring when he's not playing!
Me (facetiously): So what's wrong with that?
Daughter: Because I don't know what other holes he has in his head!


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
>
>>
>> And absolutes only make teens try absolutely as hard as possible to get
>> around them.
>
> Actually that's not the case. My kids ridicule kids with tattoos. They
> see the idiot teenage motorcycle drivers and know that's why they won't be
> on one. The rules make sense and they can see that. It's not even a
> battle.

Evidently you started raising your kids to think rationally as soon as they
were born instead of waiting until they were well into their teens.

Did you manage (as my wife and I did) to never once hit them?

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Morgans" > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Skywise" > wrote
>>
>>> You seem to be in the same vein as Morgans, and not
>>> listening to what I am saying. I do what I do because of
>>> what others do on the road.
>>
>> It seems that you did not listen to my post, where I suggested how to
>> drive safely; more safely than doing what you are doing, and staying in
>> the pack of traffic. They are like blockers on a
>> "student-body-up-the-middle" football play.
>
> And you are not listening to me. I have found it to be more
> dangerous at times to remain in a block of traffic than to
> be on my own between blocks of traffic.

Quite so! Morgans remark has to be the most ignorant, naive tripe in this
whole thread.

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
>> Reading isn't really the problem. It more an apparent inability to
>> understand that there can be many possible motivations for a behavior.
>
> If you want to get all self righteous and condecending, go ahead.
> But you're not the one on the motorcycle with the idiot on the
> cell phone driving next to you. I am.


DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING!

>
> Unless you have been riding a motorcycle as long as I have on
> the same streets I have, I really think you have no right nor
> place to chide me on how to drive. Just the same, since I am not
> a pilot, I would have no right to chide you for the way you fly.
>
You must remember, Brian, that many (most?) people can't break past what
they think the law says. Further, that some would think for themselves and
go against the grain is, well...un-American :~(

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> Bob Noel > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> "John Gaquin" > wrote:
>>
>>> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message news:wBWpg.143
>>> >
>>> > I agree, but the issue is that the rule is stupid and should be
>>> > changed.
>>>
>>> And you have some inherent right to arbitrarily disregard rules you
>>> consider stupid? Work to get the rule changed. Until such time, abide
>>> by the rules.
>>
>> otoh - he isn't disregarding a rule because he thinks he is more
>> important than me. His stated reason is that he believes he is safer.
>> Let's not lose sight of the fact that four wheel drivers are a major
>> risk for motorcycle riders.
>
> Thank you!!!! I do this because I have founf through empirical
> evidence that it is safer.

One of the "rules" that Bondurant Schools teach for high-speed driving is:
"Don't let yourself get boxed in." It's amazing how many people blithely go
about oblivious to what's around them until it's too late.

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Morgans" > wrote in news:Dd_pg.3581$YN4.1028
> @fe03.lga:
>
>>
>> "John Clear" > wrote
>>>
>>> The rules depend on the location. In CA, lane splitting is legal,
>>> so the motorcyclist who passes cars at a light is following the
>>> rules. Even the motorcycle cops in CA lane split.
>>
>> Cal is strange. (there's a news flash ! <g>) It is illegal to buy
>> acetone,
>> but you can zoom between cars on a bike.
>
> Really? I can go down to my local Home Depot and by acetone
> by the gallon.
>
> <Snipola>
>> I'll be the one out beside the others, forming the rolling roadblock, to
>> keep ALL of the traffic moving at a good speed.
>
> Geee...what an ass. You might get run off the road or shot
> at for doing that. And here I'm the bad guy for whitelining,
> which does not interfere with other's driving.

Morgan is utterly clueless on this and so many other subjects; you're
wasting your time trying to reason with him.

Jay Honeck wrote:
-- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
*************************

Been riding since I was 16. Currently ride Harley Davidson 87 XLH. I
ride often--even running local errands on bike. I immediately feel
about 15 years younger when I sit on my motorcycle <G>

www.Rosspilot.com

In article . com>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>
>It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
>to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
>currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?

I rode a bike to work for a couple of years. First a Yamaha Twin Special,
then a Honda CX500 and then a Suzuki Katana.

I had a LOT of close calls. One day, I had one too many and sold the bike
to get a VW Beetle. It took me 2 years to stop wearing boots and leather
every day.



--
Eduardo K. | To put a pipe in byte mode,
http://www.carfun.cl | type PIPE_TYPE_BYTE.
http://e.nn.cl | (from the Visual C++ help file.)

Matt Barrow wrote:

> Me talking to daughter: So, did you date that football player that asked you
> out?
> Daughter: Hell, no; he wears an earring when he's not playing!
> Me (facetiously): So what's wrong with that?
> Daughter: Because I don't know what other holes he has in his head!
>

Boy, I hope my two daughters turn out like that. :-) Way to go Matt!

Monk

Matt Barrow wrote:

> "Newps" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>>And absolutes only make teens try absolutely as hard as possible to get
>>>around them.
>>
>>Actually that's not the case. My kids ridicule kids with tattoos. They
>>see the idiot teenage motorcycle drivers and know that's why they won't be
>>on one. The rules make sense and they can see that. It's not even a
>>battle.
>
>
> Evidently you started raising your kids to think rationally as soon as they
> were born instead of waiting until they were well into their teens.
>
> Did you manage (as my wife and I did) to never once hit them?

No, they got whacked every once in a while until about age 5.

Morgans wrote:
> "Philip S." > wrote
>
>
>
>>If you're referring to noise complaints about aircraft, there's really no
>>comparison. It's not like I chose to live next to a motocross track or
>>something.
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure that he is comparing Jake brakes on trucks and straight
> pipes on motorcycles.
>
> Do you know what Jake brakes are?

Yes, and I've used one a fair bit. :-)

Have you?

Matt

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> John Gaquin wrote:
>
>> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>>>I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>>
>>
>> And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
>> car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
>> high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
>> driver.
>
> Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
> many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
> splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.
> People should be rewarded for saving fuel, especially when it doesn't harm
> others. Allowing motorcycles to lane split doesn't really have any
> significant adverse impact on the cars stuck in the line so what is the
> harm assuming it is done prudently and safely? I'm not talking about
> riding 60 MPH between a closely spaced line of cars, but most interstates
> provide at least 6' between cars and that is plenty for a motorcyle to
> ride in at 15-20 MPH.
>
>
> Matt

A large part of the motoring public seems to disengage their brain when the
engage the transmission of their car.

I spent a number of years as a motor officer and I hated white lining with a
passion. Even in stopped traffic and moving slowly between the lanes was
and is dangerous. First, many people see but don't register a motorcycle.
There were too many times when the second traffic moved a bit someone would
try and change lanes. They'd even look over and see the gap as traffic
moved but not see that Harley with the flashing blue strobes and pulsing
headlight! So the guy on the sport bike wouldn't stand a chance.
--
Chris Ehlbeck, PP-ASEL
"It's a license to learn, have fun and buy really expensive hamburgers."

Morgans wrote:

> Matt W wrote:
>
>
>>>Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
>>>many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
>>>splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.
>
>
> I'm not surprised that Matt feels this way. It fits.

Yes, it fits with a thinking person with a pragmatic orientation.

Matt

Morgans wrote:

> "Skywise" > wrote
>
>>Hmmmm....Have you never ever white lined?
>
>
> I don't want to come off with a holier-than-thou attitude, but the answer
> is- not even once.

Neither have I, but it still is a good idea whose time may still come.

Matt

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> Reading isn't really the problem. It more an apparent inability to
>>> understand that there can be many possible motivations for a behavior.
>>
>> If you want to get all self righteous and condecending, go ahead.
>> But you're not the one on the motorcycle with the idiot on the
>> cell phone driving next to you. I am.
>
>
> DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING!


:) :) :) :) :)


>
>>
>> Unless you have been riding a motorcycle as long as I have on
>> the same streets I have, I really think you have no right nor
>> place to chide me on how to drive. Just the same, since I am not
>> a pilot, I would have no right to chide you for the way you fly.
>>
> You must remember, Brian, that many (most?) people can't break past what
> they think the law says. Further, that some would think for themselves
> and go against the grain is, well...un-American :~(

Yeah...I guess I'm just a rebel. Sorry if I have a brain that
works. Actually, I've found through experience that having a
little intelligence can be quite a hinderance in a world that
wants everyone to conform and not make waves. So if that makes
me a rebel, then I gladly embrace the term.

But here's another example, using flying. There's all sorts of
rules and regulations saying what should be and should not be
regarding flying. But is there not a rule (if unwritten) that
says in an emergency that the rule book goes out the window?
You do what you have to do to save your ass. For me, driving is
no different.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Jose > wrote in news:0B5qg.61392$fb2.57224
@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:

>> It almost always boils
>> down to money and greed.
>
> No, it boils down to an acceptance that life has risk.
>
> Jose

No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules. If
some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million instead of 100
million, it won't get done.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in news:inbqg.11$2J4.152
@news.uswest.net:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Morgans" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Skywise" > wrote
>>>
>>>> You seem to be in the same vein as Morgans, and not
>>>> listening to what I am saying. I do what I do because of
>>>> what others do on the road.
>>>
>>> It seems that you did not listen to my post, where I suggested how to
>>> drive safely; more safely than doing what you are doing, and staying in
>>> the pack of traffic. They are like blockers on a
>>> "student-body-up-the-middle" football play.
>>
>> And you are not listening to me. I have found it to be more
>> dangerous at times to remain in a block of traffic than to
>> be on my own between blocks of traffic.
>
> Quite so! Morgans remark has to be the most ignorant, naive tripe in this
> whole thread.

Even though he has apparently been riding for 26 years, I have
the feeling he's one of those drivers that get's behind the
wheel and just blissfully drives, following the car in front
without nary a care for the world around him, mesmerized by
the worries of the day or the chatter on the radio.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"John Gaquin" > wrote in
:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>>
>> I have had no problems since I adopted my current driving style.
>>
>>
>>...When I started riding, I played
>> it 'safe'. I also had a lot of close calls. I had people
>> who would actually try to run me off the road for what
>> reason, I have no idea.
>>
>> Patience? For idiots who by their inability to drive are
>> endangering my life? You want me to have patience?!?! HA!
>>
>> Maturity? Well, let's see here. I could either blow my
>> top and start beating the **** out of people when they
>> nearly kill me on the road. or....
>
> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from
> California) there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not
> in detail. They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of
> near-death experiences, always at the hands of some other totally
> witless, incompetent, oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie
> nicknames for the different types of drivers who inconvenience them, or
> don't see the traffic world in quite the "right" way. They refuse to
> even consider that their own driving style, self-described (in their
> case) as including abrupt acceleration and braking, rapid lane changing,
> etc., may have just a little bit to do with their virtually constant
> brushes with danger. It's always the other idiots, and their
> incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
> circumstances.

Thank you for mentioning this. I am acutely aware of the
posibility that it was my driving that caused the problems.
Like I already said, I've been riding for 20 years and have
had time to try different things.

Actually, it could be said that it was my driving that caused
the problems in the past. I used to think that because I was
trying to obey the laws and be a good driver, so was everyone
else, and thus I drove accordingly. Looking back, that was
a very ignorant and naive way of seeing things. I know better
now, and have changed my driving accordingly.


> BTW, I note your other, seismic related sites. Is your background there
> professional or other? I used to be rather involved in that stuff, a
> long time ago.

Just a hobby. Although I disagree, some over in sci.geo.earthquakes
have refered to me as the resident expert. There's far smarter folks
in there than I. They just keep quiet. My forte lately has been the
debunking of quack quake predictions and predictors.

As you may have noticed, I have many technical and scientific related
interests. I also have a growing interest in critical and scientific
thinking. I've applied those skills to my driving situation and that's
how I learned that what I do now works. Empirical evidence. I don't
just 'think' or 'feel' that it works. I 'know' it does. Every now and
then I still try reverting back to "good" driving, and it usually
doesn't take long before the evidence changes me back.

Something I'd like to say is that although Morgans has apparently
been riding a few years longer than I, the difference is that we
have our experiences in different locations. It's quite likely
that our views are due simply to our unique experiences, which
makes neither of us 'right' or 'wrong'.

I just don't care for his holier-than-thou attitude about it,
suggesting that I could get shot at. What he apparently fails
to realize is that it's that kind of attitude that causes the
problems we have on the road.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

in article , Morgans at
wrote on 7/2/06 7:30 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote
>
>
>> If you're referring to noise complaints about aircraft, there's really no
>> comparison. It's not like I chose to live next to a motocross track or
>> something.
>
>
> I'm pretty sure that he is comparing Jake brakes on trucks and straight
> pipes on motorcycles.

I'm pretty sure that Jay was, yeah. But I was responding to Jose.

> Do you know what Jake brakes are?

Yeah.

in article , John Gaquin at
wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:


> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from California)
> there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
> They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
> experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless, incompetent,
> oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the different
> types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world in
> quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own driving
> style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration and
> braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do with
> their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other idiots,
> and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
> circumstances.

This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I christened
"F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed, he
got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on him
that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.

Philip S. wrote:
> in article , John Gaquin at
> wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:
>
>
>
>>Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
>>rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from California)
>>there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
>>They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
>>experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless, incompetent,
>>oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the different
>>types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world in
>>quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own driving
>>style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration and
>>braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do with
>>their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other idiots,
>>and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
>>circumstances.
>
>
> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I christened
> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed, he
> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on him
> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.

What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
you'd no longer have a license.

Sounds like an urban legend to me...

Matt

in article , Matt Whiting at
wrote on 7/3/06 5:58 PM:

> Philip S. wrote:

>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I christened
>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed, he
>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on him
>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>
> What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
> you'd no longer have a license.
>
> Sounds like an urban legend to me...
>
> Matt

Washington State. And I can assure you, it's no urban legend. I have no idea
whether the guy in question ever had his license revoked, though.

My one time in traffic court, I listened as the rap sheets of other drivers
were read out, and some of them ran on for a considerable time. And they all
had valid licenses. For the moment, anyway.

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> Jose > wrote in news:0B5qg.61392$fb2.57224
> @newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
>
>>> It almost always boils
>>> down to money and greed.
>>
>> No, it boils down to an acceptance that life has risk.
>>
>> Jose
>
> No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
> risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
> that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules. If
> some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million instead of 100
> million, it won't get done.
>
Not an entrepreneur, are you? :~)

"Philip S." > wrote in message
...
> in article , John Gaquin at
> wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:
>
>
>> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
>> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from
>> California)
>> there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
>> They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
>> experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless,
>> incompetent,
>> oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the
>> different
>> types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world
>> in
>> quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own
>> driving
>> style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration
>> and
>> braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do with
>> their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other
>> idiots,
>> and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
>> circumstances.
>
> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I christened
> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed, he
> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on him
> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>

Hmmm...most places I've seen, two tickets a month would last about a month
and a half before your license was pulled.

Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.

"Philip S." > wrote in message
...
> in article , Matt Whiting at
> wrote on 7/3/06 5:58 PM:
>
>> Philip S. wrote:
>
>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>> christened
>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed,
>>> he
>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>> him
>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>
>> What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
>> you'd no longer have a license.
>>
>> Sounds like an urban legend to me...
>>
>> Matt
>
> Washington State. And I can assure you, it's no urban legend. I have no
> idea
> whether the guy in question ever had his license revoked, though.
>
> My one time in traffic court, I listened as the rap sheets of other
> drivers
> were read out, and some of them ran on for a considerable time. And they
> all
> had valid licenses. For the moment, anyway.

Hmmm...when I had jury duty (twice...we don't have a lot of potential jurors
around here) the bailiff read the charges, but no one EVER read the rap
sheets. AAMOF, a persons record is NOT admissible in court, and that would
only be a points summary if the judge was going to revoke the drivers
license.

Try again.

in article , Matt Barrow at
wrote on 7/3/06 7:08 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> in article , Matt Whiting at
>> wrote on 7/3/06 5:58 PM:
>>
>>> Philip S. wrote:
>>
>>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>>> christened
>>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed,
>>>> he
>>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>>> him
>>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>>
>>> What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
>>> you'd no longer have a license.
>>>
>>> Sounds like an urban legend to me...
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>> Washington State. And I can assure you, it's no urban legend. I have no
>> idea
>> whether the guy in question ever had his license revoked, though.
>>
>> My one time in traffic court, I listened as the rap sheets of other
>> drivers
>> were read out, and some of them ran on for a considerable time. And they
>> all
>> had valid licenses. For the moment, anyway.
>
> Hmmm...when I had jury duty (twice...we don't have a lot of potential jurors
> around here) the bailiff read the charges, but no one EVER read the rap
> sheets. AAMOF, a persons record is NOT admissible in court, and that would
> only be a points summary if the judge was going to revoke the drivers
> license.
>
> Try again.

Umm...try again with *what*, exactly--somebody else's personal experience?
Sorry, Matt, I can only give you my own.

And my particular traffic court didn't have a jury. Perhaps it's different
where you live.

in article , Matt Barrow at
wrote on 7/3/06 6:45 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> in article , John Gaquin at
>> wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:
>>
>>
>>> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
>>> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from
>>> California)
>>> there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
>>> They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
>>> experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless,
>>> incompetent,
>>> oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the
>>> different
>>> types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world
>>> in
>>> quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own
>>> driving
>>> style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration
>>> and
>>> braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do with
>>> their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other
>>> idiots,
>>> and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
>>> circumstances.
>>
>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I christened
>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed, he
>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on him
>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>
>
> Hmmm...most places I've seen, two tickets a month would last about a month
> and a half before your license was pulled.
>
> Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.

Excuse me, not to be a grammarian or anything, but shouldn't that be "I
think"?

"Philip S." > wrote in message
...
> in article , Matt Barrow at
> wrote on 7/3/06 6:45 PM:
>
>>
>> "Philip S." > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> in article , John Gaquin at
>>> wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
>>>> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from
>>>> California)
>>>> there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
>>>> They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
>>>> experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless,
>>>> incompetent,
>>>> oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the
>>>> different
>>>> types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world
>>>> in
>>>> quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own
>>>> driving
>>>> style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration
>>>> and
>>>> braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do
>>>> with
>>>> their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other
>>>> idiots,
>>>> and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
>>>> circumstances.
>>>
>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>> christened
>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed,
>>> he
>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>> him
>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>>
>>
>> Hmmm...most places I've seen, two tickets a month would last about a
>> month
>> and a half before your license was pulled.
>>
>> Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.
>
> Excuse me, not to be a grammarian or anything, but shouldn't that be "I
> think"?

Never read Shakespeare, have 'ya?

"Philip S." > wrote in message
...
> in article , Matt Barrow at
> wrote on 7/3/06 7:08 PM:
>
>>
>> "Philip S." > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> in article , Matt Whiting at
>>> wrote on 7/3/06 5:58 PM:
>>>
>>>> Philip S. wrote:
>>>
>>>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>>>> christened
>>>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already
>>>>> guessed,
>>>>> he
>>>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>>>> him
>>>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>>>
>>>> What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
>>>> you'd no longer have a license.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like an urban legend to me...
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>
>>> Washington State. And I can assure you, it's no urban legend. I have no
>>> idea
>>> whether the guy in question ever had his license revoked, though.
>>>
>>> My one time in traffic court, I listened as the rap sheets of other
>>> drivers
>>> were read out, and some of them ran on for a considerable time. And they
>>> all
>>> had valid licenses. For the moment, anyway.
>>
>> Hmmm...when I had jury duty (twice...we don't have a lot of potential
>> jurors
>> around here) the bailiff read the charges, but no one EVER read the rap
>> sheets. AAMOF, a persons record is NOT admissible in court, and that
>> would
>> only be a points summary if the judge was going to revoke the drivers
>> license.
>>
>> Try again.
>
> Umm...try again with *what*, exactly--somebody else's personal experience?
> Sorry, Matt, I can only give you my own.
>
> And my particular traffic court didn't have a jury. Perhaps it's different
> where you live.

My experience wasn't traffic court, it was judicial court. That court had
jurisdiction for an traffic offenses that were classified as misdemeanor or
higher.

IAC, a subjects record is _not likely_ to be read into the record for a
traffic court. In our area, a license cannot be revoked by a traffic court,
only a judicial court.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

in article , Matt Barrow at
wrote on 7/3/06 7:41 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> in article , Matt Barrow at
>> wrote on 7/3/06 6:45 PM:
>>
>>>
>>> "Philip S." > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> in article , John Gaquin at
>>>> wrote on 7/3/06 7:48 AM:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's some kind of SoCal thing. You ought to drop in on
>>>>> rec.autos.driving. There are about 4-5 people (I think 3 from
>>>>> California)
>>>>> there sound a great deal like you in general outlook, if not in detail.
>>>>> They regale the whole newsgroup with almost daily tales of near-death
>>>>> experiences, always at the hands of some other totally witless,
>>>>> incompetent,
>>>>> oblivious driver. They've even invented cutsie nicknames for the
>>>>> different
>>>>> types of drivers who inconvenience them, or don't see the traffic world
>>>>> in
>>>>> quite the "right" way. They refuse to even consider that their own
>>>>> driving
>>>>> style, self-described (in their case) as including abrupt acceleration
>>>>> and
>>>>> braking, rapid lane changing, etc., may have just a little bit to do
>>>>> with
>>>>> their virtually constant brushes with danger. It's always the other
>>>>> idiots,
>>>>> and their incompetent driving, that force these guys into horrendous
>>>>> circumstances.
>>>>
>>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>>> christened
>>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already guessed,
>>>> he
>>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>>> him
>>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm...most places I've seen, two tickets a month would last about a
>>> month
>>> and a half before your license was pulled.
>>>
>>> Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.
>>
>> Excuse me, not to be a grammarian or anything, but shouldn't that be "I
>> think"?
>
> Never read Shakespeare, have 'ya?

Matt, that's what's known as a "joke". I'll admit it's not original--I heard
it on an episode of "Cheers". Unless, of course, you think I'm lying.

in article , Matt Barrow at
wrote on 7/3/06 7:47 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote in message
> ...
>> in article , Matt Barrow at
>> wrote on 7/3/06 7:08 PM:
>>
>>>
>>> "Philip S." > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> in article , Matt Whiting at
>>>> wrote on 7/3/06 5:58 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> Philip S. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> This is funny, and it reminds me of a guy I used to know whom I
>>>>>> christened
>>>>>> "F***in' cops". He'd storm into work at least once or twice a month
>>>>>> muttering "F***in' cops!". And yes, as you've probably already
>>>>>> guessed,
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> got one or two traffic tickets a month. Naturally, it never dawned on
>>>>>> him
>>>>>> that driving the speed limit might be the answer to his troubles.
>>>>>
>>>>> What state was that? In PA or NY, you do that for about two months and
>>>>> you'd no longer have a license.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like an urban legend to me...
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>> Washington State. And I can assure you, it's no urban legend. I have no
>>>> idea
>>>> whether the guy in question ever had his license revoked, though.
>>>>
>>>> My one time in traffic court, I listened as the rap sheets of other
>>>> drivers
>>>> were read out, and some of them ran on for a considerable time. And they
>>>> all
>>>> had valid licenses. For the moment, anyway.
>>>
>>> Hmmm...when I had jury duty (twice...we don't have a lot of potential
>>> jurors
>>> around here) the bailiff read the charges, but no one EVER read the rap
>>> sheets. AAMOF, a persons record is NOT admissible in court, and that
>>> would
>>> only be a points summary if the judge was going to revoke the drivers
>>> license.
>>>
>>> Try again.
>>
>> Umm...try again with *what*, exactly--somebody else's personal experience?
>> Sorry, Matt, I can only give you my own.
>>
>> And my particular traffic court didn't have a jury. Perhaps it's different
>> where you live.
>
> My experience wasn't traffic court, it was judicial court. That court had
> jurisdiction for an traffic offenses that were classified as misdemeanor or
> higher.

Well, that certainly explains why you felt qualified to comment on my
experience in traffic court.

> IAC, a subjects record is _not likely_ to be read into the record for a
> traffic court. In our area, a license cannot be revoked by a traffic court,
> only a judicial court.

I don't live in your area.

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
>
> Never read Shakespeare, have 'ya?


Methinks he doth protest too much.

"Philip S." > wrote in message
>>
>> Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.
>
> Excuse me, not to be a grammarian or anything, but shouldn't that be "I
> think"?

Old English usage, considered archaic today, but not unheard of. Format
made famous by Big Bill the Writer. :-)

in article , John Gaquin at
wrote on 7/3/06 7:58 PM:

>
> "Philip S." > wrote in message
>>>
>>> Methinks you exaggerate....grossly.
>>
>> Excuse me, not to be a grammarian or anything, but shouldn't that be "I
>> think"?
>
> Old English usage, considered archaic today, but not unheard of. Format
> made famous by Big Bill the Writer. :-)

Actually, it's circa the mid-1980s, derived from the Woody Harrelson.

Serves me right, quoting from such an obscure television series.

I won't criticise anyone for erring on the side of safety. That is
their perogative - and I appreciate the lack of traffic when the
weather turns nasty. It's just that it is obvious that their comfort
level with the conditions is significantly less than mine. I've seen
the exact opposite in other parts of the world - where the unprepared
plunge headlong into the unknown - and frequently pay the price for
their foolishness. I haven't had any run-ins with rednecks yet, but you
never know what will be around the next curve. Just this evening I had
an encounter with a groundhog while riding that could easily have
turned dramatic.

As for the debate about whitelining - I am not opposed to it in
principle. I favor making the most efficient use of the available
resources (pavement in this case), and do feel that the American
mindset of "stay in line and follow the leader" doesn't jibe with it.
That doesn't make it wrong - but does make it dangerous. I have driven
in third world countries where it is par for the course for the
2-wheelers (and sometimes 3-wheelers) to maneuver around all the cars,
trucks and buses stopped at a light -so as to be at the front when it
changes. Everyone accepts this situation - so it isn't a problem. Now
if we can get ower the notion that someone who passes you when you are
stuck in traffic (because their vehicle gives them the ability to do
so) is somehow taking unfair advantage of the situation, our highways
will be a better (and safer) place to be. Having said that, do I
whiteline? Nope - because I'm well aware of the hazards involved. The
closest I will come is to use a partial lane to make a right or left
turn. In other words, I'l pass on the left or right of stopped traffic
if I'm planning to turn (provided there is adequate space to do so
safely)- but never down the middle.

David Johnson

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in news:PGjqg.11$Oy2.3471
@news.uswest.net:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Jose > wrote in news:0B5qg.61392$fb2.57224
>> @newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
>>
>>>> It almost always boils
>>>> down to money and greed.
>>>
>>> No, it boils down to an acceptance that life has risk.
>>>
>>> Jose
>>
>> No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
>> risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
>> that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules. If
>> some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million instead of 100
>> million, it won't get done.
>>
> Not an entrepreneur, are you? :~)

If you mean, do I try to find ways to make 1 person do 10
peoples jobs and pay them squat ****, then sell the item
for 100x what it costs to manufacturer...no, I guess I'm
not an entrepeneur. :)

I have no problem with making a profit, even getting rich.
I do have a problem with taking it to such an extreme that
it hurts people.

Take for example this bloke who just donated 30 some odd
billion dollars to charity. Obviously he doesn't need it
nor want it. Not that I'm belittling charitble contributions,
but I have to wonder if raising all his hourly employee
wages by a buck/hour wouldn't have done far more to help
more people than this charity.

As another example, I have a family member who works for
an amusement park. Instead of them hiring a couple more
people (their shop is understaffed) and giving them a decent
wage (which is likely why they no one is applying for work),
or getting them the supplies they need, or putting in air
conditioning in the building where it get's hotter than
outside...no...they spend all the money on new rides and
buying new parks. Business isn't increasing, btw.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

> No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
> risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
> that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules.

Well gee, is it greed for me to choose the gas station that sells gas
the cheapest? Is it greed for me to shop when there are sales? Is it
greed for me to ask for a raise? Is it greed for me to try to buy this
house for as little as I can squeeze the seller for?

Is it greed that I don't give my money away willy nilly?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On 2006-07-01, john smith > wrote:
> After reading numerous reports about crushed bones and the long
> rehabilition process, I decide there would not be a motorcycle in my
> future.

But instead, general aviation - which some statistics show as being
twice as dangerous as riding a motorcycle on the public highway!

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in news:PGjqg.11$Oy2.3471
> @news.uswest.net:
>
>>
>> "Skywise" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Jose > wrote in news:0B5qg.61392$fb2.57224
>>> @newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
>>>
>>>>> It almost always boils
>>>>> down to money and greed.
>>>>
>>>> No, it boils down to an acceptance that life has risk.
>>>>
>>>> Jose
>>>
>>> No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
>>> risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
>>> that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules. If
>>> some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million instead of 100
>>> million, it won't get done.
>>>
>> Not an entrepreneur, are you? :~)
>
> If you mean, do I try to find ways to make 1 person do 10
> peoples jobs and pay them squat ****, then sell the item
> for 100x what it costs to manufacturer...no, I guess I'm
> not an entrepeneur. :)

Obviously.

> I have no problem with making a profit, even getting rich.
> I do have a problem with taking it to such an extreme that
> it hurts people.

Your logic chain here is....well, weird!

Jose > wrote in news:lEtqg.165096$F_3.58799
@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:

>> No, it's greed. If there is a safer alternative, one with less
>> risk as you put it, more often than not the only thing preventing
>> that safer solution from being used is greed...money rules.
>
> Well gee, is it greed for me to choose the gas station that sells gas
> the cheapest? Is it greed for me to shop when there are sales? Is it
> greed for me to ask for a raise? Is it greed for me to try to buy this
> house for as little as I can squeeze the seller for?
>
> Is it greed that I don't give my money away willy nilly?
>
> Jose

You snipped out the important part of my post in your reply.
Here it is again,

"If some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million
instead of 100 million, it won't get done."

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in news:Ypuqg.5$Oi3.522
@news.uswest.net:

>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
<Snipola>

>> I have no problem with making a profit, even getting rich.
>> I do have a problem with taking it to such an extreme that
>> it hurts people.
>
> Your logic chain here is....well, weird!

Let's reverse this then. Are you saying it's ok to make such
an excessive profit if people get hurt by it? By hurt, I mean
economically, as in not making enough money to live on, or
being unable to afford basic needs.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

> You snipped out the important part of my post in your reply.
> Here it is again,
>
> "If some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million
> instead of 100 million, it won't get done."

So back to my question - is there an arbitrary amount of money beyond
which it is greed? Who decided that amount?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

>> You snipped out the important part of my post in your reply.
>> Here it is again,
>>
>> "If some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million
>> instead of 100 million, it won't get done."
>
>
> So back to my question - is there an arbitrary amount of money beyond
> which it is greed? Who decided that amount?

If you have more than me, then you are greedy. I decided that. :-)

Matt

Chris Ehlbeck wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>John Gaquin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Skywise" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>>Another favorite tactic is white lining. In a perfect
>>>>scenario I white line to the front while everyone is stopped
>>>>at a red light. ........The upshot is that
>>>>I am only near other vehicles when they aren't moving.
>>>
>>>
>>>And every time you pull that sort of stunt, you leave in your wake 50-100
>>>car drivers highly ****ed at the next motorcycles they encounter. That's
>>>high school crap, and has no place in the repertoire of a responsible
>>>driver.
>>
>>Baloney. It is simply a good idea that hasn't yet come to fruition in
>>many places in the US. Encouraging motorcycle riding by allowing lane
>>splitting is at least as good an idea as having bus and car pool lanes.
>>People should be rewarded for saving fuel, especially when it doesn't harm
>>others. Allowing motorcycles to lane split doesn't really have any
>>significant adverse impact on the cars stuck in the line so what is the
>>harm assuming it is done prudently and safely? I'm not talking about
>>riding 60 MPH between a closely spaced line of cars, but most interstates
>>provide at least 6' between cars and that is plenty for a motorcyle to
>>ride in at 15-20 MPH.
>>
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> A large part of the motoring public seems to disengage their brain when the
> engage the transmission of their car.
>
> I spent a number of years as a motor officer and I hated white lining with a
> passion. Even in stopped traffic and moving slowly between the lanes was
> and is dangerous. First, many people see but don't register a motorcycle.
> There were too many times when the second traffic moved a bit someone would
> try and change lanes. They'd even look over and see the gap as traffic
> moved but not see that Harley with the flashing blue strobes and pulsing
> headlight! So the guy on the sport bike wouldn't stand a chance.

That is a different problem and doesn't change the validity of the
technique. It seems to work fine in at least some parts of Europe. If
we had decent driver training in this country, including periodic
recurrent training and recertification, much of this problem could be
addressed.


Matt

Jose > wrote in news:ClCqg.34018$VE1.27273
@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com:

>> You snipped out the important part of my post in your reply.
>> Here it is again,
>>
>> "If some rich mutha'****a would only make 50 million
>> instead of 100 million, it won't get done."
>
> So back to my question - is there an arbitrary amount of money beyond
> which it is greed?

No specific value. It's not that simple. Perhaps too complex to
be worth continuing this discussion.

> Who decided that amount?

Society.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

"Chris Ehlbeck" > wrote in
:

<Snipola>
> A large part of the motoring public seems to disengage their brain when
> the engage the transmission of their car.
>
> I spent a number of years as a motor officer and I hated white lining
> with a passion. Even in stopped traffic and moving slowly between the
> lanes was and is dangerous.

How it is dangerous? Except maybe from someone opening a door or
throwing trash out the window? Even then, it's far less dangerous
than being at speed and having some idiot changin lanes into you
because they're too busy on the cell phone.


> First, many people see but don't register a motorcycle.
> There were too many times when the second traffic moved a bit someone
> would try and change lanes.

Which is why, as I stated in MY FIRST POST on this, that ideally
I do this when the traffic is NOT moving, thus removing the
danger of someone changing lanes. Kinda hard to change lanes
when the spedometer reads 0 mph.

And also stated previously, I pay attention to the traffic
situation. If I am not at elast 90% certain that I can get to
the front BEFORE the light turns green, I stay behind.



> They'd even look over and see the gap as traffic
> moved but not see that Harley with the flashing blue strobes and pulsing
> headlight! So the guy on the sport bike wouldn't stand a chance.

If that driver doesn't see a cop that's lit up, that driver
should not be on the road. I presume you pulled them over and
ticketed them? If not, then you just reinforced they're belief
(even if subconscious) that they can be bad drivers and get
away with it.

Hell. It doesn't matter. I've seen people do bad **** right in
front of a cop and the cop does nothing. I've even seen cops
do some pretty bad driving. On occasion, I've subsequently
confronted them about it.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Matt Whiting > wrote in news:xYEqg.246$Pa.29561
@news1.epix.net:

<Snipola>
> That is a different problem and doesn't change the validity of the
> technique. It seems to work fine in at least some parts of Europe. If
> we had decent driver training in this country, including periodic
> recurrent training and recertification, much of this problem could be
> addressed.

ABSOLUTELY!!! Driver education in this country is a farce.
I like some of the things they do in Europe re driver
training and bad drivers.

For one, I like the idea that a ticket's fine is commensurate
upon the recipients income. A $300 ticket to someone who
makes minimum wage is a big deal. To someone who makes 100k
a year, so what? Hit them in the pocket book and they'll
'get it'.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

>> Who decided that amount?
>
> Society.

You mean, the part of society that is not greedy?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

>>> Who decided that amount?
>>
>>
>> Society.
>
>
> You mean, the part of society that is not greedy?

Ha, ha, ha... Good one!

Matt

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Flyingmonk wrote:
>
>> I now only have a basket case ( I took it apart years ago with the
>> intention of totally rebuilding it) 197? 750cc Suzuki two stroke
>> (shoiuld be very fast vintage cafe racer).
>
> Errr... Make that 500ccSuzuki two stroke. A T500 or a GT 500 Haven't
> been in the garage in awhile.
>
> Bryan
>

What did you misplace 250cc when you took it apart?

Jose > wrote in news:mwHqg.60108$Lm5.38218
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:

>>> Who decided that amount?
>>
>> Society.
>
> You mean, the part of society that is not greedy?
>
> Jose

Perhaps I'm not clear on what I mean by greed. I'm talking about
excessive unrelenting greed for profit derived without regard
to the human condition.

For example, take again that feller that 'donated' 30+ billion
dollars to charity. Obviously he has no need or want for it,
or else he wouldn't be giving it away.

Just doing a quick number crunch, 30 billion dollars would give
721,154 people a $1 an hour raise for 20 years. I'd bet that
would do far more to help people - and the economy - than giving
30B in *stocks* to another rich mans 'charity' where only the
interest on those stocks would be used to do any good. And what
if the stocks tank? Then the charity tanks.

Look, I have no problem with making profit, even making lot's
of profit. What I do have a problem with is making that profit
by reducing the work force to near 'slave labor' conditions to
make that profit.

I'm sorry if my giving a **** about other peoples livelihoods
and quality of life is so offensive to you.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

No and no.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Flying Machine - http://pad39a.com/gene/
Because we fly, we envy no one.


> It used to be that most pilots I knew rode motorcycles, but that seems
> to be less of a correlation lately. Wot say the group -- do you
> currently ride a motorcycle? Did you in the past?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps I'm not clear on what I mean by greed. I'm talking about
> excessive unrelenting greed for profit derived without regard
> to the human condition.

How excessive is "excessive"? And aren't you unrelenting in your greed?
I mean, you still insist on getting paid at your job, right? Or if
retired, of getting all your retirement benefits? Even though other
people could benefit from them?

> For example, take again that feller that 'donated' 30+ billion
> dollars to charity. Obviously he has no need or want for it,
> or else he wouldn't be giving it away.

I guess he's greedy for giving his money away. Hmmm, tell me again how
the world is banana shaped. And he's not just "giving it away", he's
giving it to an organization which supports causes he supports, by and
large, and will see to it that his money is used more or less to further
causes he believes in. That's hardly "no need or want of it".

> Just doing a quick number crunch, 30 billion dollars would give
> 721,154 people a $1 an hour raise for 20 years. I'd bet that
> would do far more to help people - and the economy...

That's laughable. If people had free money, they wouldn't be as
interested in working so hard, or at less interesting jobs. There would
be a shortage of burger flippers, wages would go up, prices would go up,
and all the extra free money would not buy more burgers. It would buy
the same number of more expensive but still mediocre burgers. It's the
fallacy of welfare.

> Look, I have no problem with making profit, even making lot's
> of profit.

"lots of profit". Or perhaps, "Lot's profit", since "salary" comes from
"salt".

> What I do have a problem with is making that profit
> by reducing the work force to near 'slave labor' conditions to
> make that profit.

Slaves are forced by their owners to work. Employees are not owned.
They are not forced to work, except by the same conditions that force
you and I to work, and I bet we are working under "slave labor"
conditions compared to those rich tycoons in Beverly Hills, who can go
into a recording studio and make a million for sneezing with the right
intonation.

If workers don't like the deal, they can work elsewhere. If customers
don't like the deal, they can buy elsewhere.

The problem is not greed, nor is it rich individuals. The problem is
the disparity between the power of an individual vs a large corporation
like WalMart or Microsoft. WalMart affects millions when it decides to
quit (or enter) an area, an individual has little effect on a
corporation like WalMart. This is why unions were developed, but then
unions =became= large corporations, and became the problem rather than
the solution. There is a similar issue between government and their
subjects. In aviation terms, look at the difference between buying and
flying certificated aircraft vs homebuilt ones - it's the same effect
(or rather, the same fundamental cause).

Corporations are supposed to be greedy. That's how stockholders get
their dividends. If you feel you are on the wrong end of the stick, buy
some stock. Then, while trying to figure out how you are going to put
your kids through college, tell the corporation to lower prices and
reduce dividends. You won't mind losing all that filthy lucre, and your
kids won't mind not going to college.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Nevermind, Jose. You're reading what you want to read in
my posts and not what I'm saying.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?