As I have already said elsewhere, I fully agree with you on this subject.
Jail just makes bad people worst, and the only result you get by putting somebody whose fault is in having made a bad decision into jail is turning him into a full fledged criminal, and the taxpayers actually pay for this.
Long term social service to be performed after regular job, and extra work done after regular job (let's say on alternate days) with the extra salary resulting turned to the victim is the answer. You don't weigh on the community, and actually contribute to make it better. You ruin the life of a person, and pay making several other people's lives a little better and pay for the damage you have done.
It's not much, I agree, but beats the hell out of the current system.

I agree with you here too. You have to cope with whatever the system is at the moment, and bitching or wishful thinking about how the system "should" be won't get you anything. But this shouldn't refrain everybody to try to get a BETTER system for the future.

 

True. But the difference between most animals and human beings is that human beings don't need direct experience to learn, and are capable of learning from the collective experience. Otherwise, we would still be smashing stuff with animal bones.
I try to never have to learn the hard way, if there's somebody who already did that can share some advice on his bad experience.
BTW: Harleyforever isn't "preaching". He's just stating some facts. You're interested, you mind his words. You're not, you are free to do whatever you think right. What's the problem?
Isn't the whole motorcycle stuff all about freedom, after all?
Let those who ride decide.

 

NOW you're starting to preach and, no, usually ABS won't help you in such a case, as ABS works only when you brake.
This is just a case of the bike slipping from under you.
There are some bikes with ESP now, and that's another thing, but **** sometimes happens.
The core point about safety and security is learning to get better, and learning when to stop.
It's a matter of chance. You may make your chances better, not 100% safe. If you pick the short straw, you pick the short straw.
I know this coming from a recent accident where a moron driving far over his limits lost control of his car and slammed into mine, causing a lot of damage, luckily without loss of life or limb on either part. I've worried for some time and thought a lot about what I could have done to avoid it. But you know? Hindsight is 20/20. Yes, knowing he was coming up the other way I could have been driving slower (I'd have been HOME, had I known such idiot was around!). Truth is, looking at it rationally and pragmatically, I couldn't have done a f..ing thing. I was driving carefully, slowly as the road conditions dictated, with a perfectly tuned car in perfect conditions. When he cannonballed out of that curve, I managed to almost to stop and drove my car amost into the ditch to avoid him. Wasn't enough not because of anything wrong I did, but because he screwed up so bad that there was no possible recovery. My safe driving actually saved his life, probably.
You may have done everything right and not make it. It's that simple.
Soldiers and cops usually know this very well.
Overdoing the safety thing can be as dangerous as not doing anything. Sometimes, spending your money in gas and experience in riding is safer than spending it in security gadgets.
So, I will get double discs for my FXDC, and if possible I'll get ABS. But I know for sure that the bikes' current safety features far surpass my skill, so while I wait to have enough money to buy them, I'll ride within my limits, and the limits of the bike, and hope it's not my time to pull the short straw.

 

I won't bother to look more studies up as most are flawed as badly as the two you present.

The first article cites the New England Journal of Medicine and gives the date of publication so I went to the Article itself. Upon reading the abstract I found what I suspected and read the details of the study.
The purpose of the study was to find cell phone usage while driving to be a dangerous activity and ....SURPRIZE!....they were able to do so by reviewing accidents, not all driving activity but only accidents by people that volunteered their phone records. They found that people that had been on their phone within 15 minutes of an accident were four times more likely than people that hadn't been on the phone during their drive. That study used 699 out of 5890 drivers contacted. The collision times were exact for only 231 people, only 170 of those had been on the phone within ten minutes of the accident occuring. This makes having an accident while having used a cell phone in the last ten minutes four times greater than not having been on the cell phone for ten minutes prior to an accident.

Do I need to explain any more or do you get the idea just how screwy this study is? Here's a link to the original article so anyone can read it in it's entirety

The second article cites it and the 1997 study as the only two studies ever done. Both used the same criteria to arrive at the same conclusion.

Summary, statistics can be compiled to arrive at a predetermined conclusion...consistently.

Thank you for citing the information used to form your opinion.

 

I also cited a study later form the University of Utah and University of Toronto. And the study from Johns Hopkins tells why there is an increased risk after the phone is hung up for approximately 15 minutes. They tracked the changes in the brain via MRI. It's the same phenomena as "tunnel vision" police often get when in pursuits. If you choose to not believe the studies, that's your choice, but it's funny they all come to the same conclusion, that you are 4 to 5 times more at risk of causing an accident when on a cell phone, hands free or not, the same increased risk as when at the legal limit for DUI, which is exactly what I said.

 

The first article you cited was from Toronto. The second was from Australia. The methodolgy was developed to come to a predetermined conclusion.

I asked where you got the information to form your opinion, you finally provided that information which shows the methodology used. You chose to believe the research is valid when it clearly shows it's flawed.

The only fact that I can gather from the studies is that distracted drivers cause accidents. The source of the distraction is irrelevant as the numbers would suggest.

 

I bet you've been caught arguing with a telephone pole , haven't you ? GOOD GOD Einstein. Why would He have to prove anything. Everyone knows c phones

 

It has nothing to do with wanting to hear the keys rattle on the computer, it has to do with people trying to assign blame for their and other's behavior on an inanimate object such as a cell phone.

The simple fact is people aren't willing to accept responsibility for their actions and think if they can find an excuse, any excuse, then they won't be held accountable.

Global warming - big oil, auto accidents - cell phone, unplanned pregnancy - abortion, it doesn't matter what the topic, it boils down to people wanting someone else, usually government, to do something to take the responsibility and the freedom that goes with it, away.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What about CB radios? How is it possible that CBs have been used for so many decades without the cry for a banning of their use while driving? Why is it that the plans are underway to equip every commercial vehicle in the U.S. with satellite communications? What about conversations with passengers in the same car? What about GPS units that are selling like hotcakes, even autos equipped from the factory with these "distracting" units? What about unruly children acting up in the backseat?

 

We had an incidentrecently where a women wasn't paying attention or was on her cell in her brand new BMW cage, she went thru the stop sign, hit the Ultra and killed both riders. The man had just retired (early 50's) and wanted to enjoy retirement with his wife traveling on his new bike. He had it 6 months and now he and his wife are dead. The DA found no criminal intent or liability so the women in the BMW was only given MV citations.

This is a catch 22. I don't have an answer. In truth I don't think there is an answer. Sometimes things are truly an accident butwhen its someone close it becomes a different story.

 

if your theory was correct, we wouldn't have anybody in jail for murder...

people know that if they murder someone they could go to jail and/or be put to death...

murder rates are still on the rise, though, aren't they?