I bet it doesn’t take five minutes for motorcycles to come up in conversation between me and a stranger. As many readers here probably know firsthand, after discovering that I’m a motorcycle enthusiast, I’m often met with comments like “I just don’t think I could ever ride a motorcycle; with everyone texting and driving, drivers are too distracted and motorcycles are already dangerous”. I’m not going to discount that many drivers are less than attentive to the road, and while motorcycles are inherently more challenging than cars, I don’t think prospective riders should sell themselves short, motorcycles may not be as dangerous as you think.
Someone right now just read that last sentence and said “What do you mean they’re not dangerous!?!!?” followed by “statistics show that you’re 30% more likely to die riding a motorcycle than riding in a car”. Statistics are fun things to discuss, and the discussion can have merit, assuming you understand what conclusions you can draw from statistics, and what is still undetermined. Let’s talk about a few (United States) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics for 2013 shall we?
- In 2013, there were 247.4 million cars and 8.4 million motorcycles registered in the United States.
- Of registered Non-Motorcycles, there were 28,051 fatalities and 2.2 million (reported) injuries.
- Of those 8.4 million bikes (3% of all registered vehicles), the NHTSA claims that only 20.3 trillion miles were traveled on those motorcycles (2,423 miles on average; 0.7% of total miles traveled by all registered vehicles).
- 4,668 motorcyclists were killed on 2013, while an estimated 88,000 were injured.
- Of the 4,668 motorcyclists killed, 269 were passengers.
- That year motorcyclists made up 14% of all traffic fatalities, 4% of (reported) traffic injuries, while only 3% of all registered vehicles.
- Of 2013 motorcycle incidents, there were 2,182 two-vehicle fatal crashes involving a motorcycle and another type of vehicle (47%).
- In 42% (922) of these (2,182) crashes, the other vehicles were turning left while the motorcycles were going straight, passing, or overtaking other vehicles. Both vehicles were going straight in 456 crashes (21%).
- In 2013, 34% of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal crashes were speeding. (Note: The NHTSA considers a crash to be “speeding-related” if the driver was charged with a speeding-related offense or if an investigating police officer indicated that racing, driving too fast for conditions, or exceeding the posted speed limit was a contributing factor in the crash.)
- 25% of motorcycle fatalities were unlicensed riders.
- 28% of fatal motorcycle accident victims measured above 0.08% Blood Alcohol Content.
- 19.6% of motorcyclists killed had prior speeding convictions.
- 17.9% of motorcyclists killed had prior license suspensions or revocations.
- 55% of motorcyclists killed were over age 40 (42 was the average age of all riders involved in fatal accidents).
- California, North Carolina, and New York rank 3rd, 4th, and 6th (respectively) among states with the most motorcycle fatalities in 2013, all three of which have universal (mandatory) helmet laws.
- Lastly, in 2013, 4,735 Pedestrians were killed, vs. 4,668 motorcyclists.
Based on these statistics it seems very clear that if you don’t have a license you’ll most certainly be killed while riding a motorcycle… and it should also be illegal to purchase a motorcycle after your 40th birthday…
I think it’s apparent that the above statistics have led people to some less than accurate conclusions. Per miles traveled and as a percentage of overall “highway” fatalities, it is true that motorcyclists make up a disproportionate part of overall fatalities, however there are points ignored by simple numbers and other data that is not collected.
I understand the intended premise of comparing motorcycles to cars based on average mileage, however I think that ignores that fact that in the United States motorcycles are essentially treated as toys. A large proportion of the U.S. population commutes to work every day in a car (about 10,000 miles annually for me, just going to work), while some riders only get the bike out on Sunday, and only when it’s sunny and 70. My point is merely that the statistics are ignoring the personality characteristics of who is riding a motorcycle, and who is frankly being killed on a motorcycle (same goes for cars honestly). The statistics also show that drugs, alcohol, and otherwise risky behaviors contribute to motorcycle fatalities (injury rates are similar); 
dare I suggest that these people behave the same way in cars, but survive crashes? On the same note, would it be plausible to believe that people who disregard their own safety gravitate toward motorcycles and therefore skew the statistics? A lot of people, including many motorcyclists, focus on other cars being the greatest threat, however the majority of accidents involve no other vehicles, only the motorcycle. That’s kind of the subtle irony that many people don’t realize, while traffic and conditions play a role in some fatalities, more often than not, the skill or choices of the rider have the largest impact on the fatal outcome. Ultimately I don’t see how motorcyclists, as such a small sample size, can be judged accurately, just by numbers, against such a large pool of drivers.
Beyond my anecdotal comments, and what the statistics do show, there is information that is clearly lacking. The NHTSA stats don’t delineate (exactly) which riders are wearing helmets, wearing safety gear, and have had rider safety training. The statistics do discuss day or night (and the coincidental connection with alcohol…), 
but they do not describe the weather conditions. I’m curious how many fatal accidents happen in the rain, and general time of year; like what’s the accident frequency in January? I assume summer time is the “deadliest” time for motorcyclists, certainly there are more bikes on the road, but how does it affect survivability? Considering that many riders won’t brave the rain, I suspect that statics will show that most accidents occur during bright sunny days (or drunk evenings…); if so, does that mean that skilled pilots riding in inclement weather are underrepresented in statistical data? I’m also curious how many motorcycle fatalities are a result of motorcycle on motorcycle collisions, or “chain reaction” crashes where several bikes blow a curve following the lead bike, all riding beyond their ability. 
Similar to bikers demonizing “cagers”, I think many riders don’t realize the threats of group riding. Groups of motorcycles are certainly more noticeable to drivers, but I find that many riders begin riding in groups before they’re truly ready, and find themselves sucked in by the “I have to keep up” mentality, or “it’s just a couple beers”, which is even worse. Considering my car insurance went down after age 25, I’m forced to assume that with age comes experience and experience tends to thwart accidents. Naturally the statistics can only tell us the average miles traveled per motorcycle (assuming it’s accurate), but the statistics do not tell us how many motorcycles a given rider owns, or how many miles that rider puts on a bike annually. While American motorcyclists don’t ride enough in general, I suspect there is a correlation between annual mileage and (relative) rider safety. They say “with age comes experience” (and wisdom) but that may a misnomer with regard to motorcycles considering that the majority of fatalities happen in the 40 plus age group, however I think there’s a generational factor there; again, the stats can’t explain that.
Statistics are one thing, but many people don’t realize that becoming a motorcyclist changes the way you traverse the roads. It goes without saying, I’ll ride ten minutes out of my way if that means I avoid traffic lights or simply get a few more twisties. I have a feeling most riders “take the back way” more often when riding; my uncle used to say “on a motorcycle, everything is on-the-way.”
Now, taking the back-way is actually a double edged sword, while on the backroads you may have reduced the amount of traffic you compete with, intersections are virtually the most dangerous place for a motorcycle. Unlike the freeway, where we’re all going the same way, the backroads have more intersections, increased road debris, and hidden driveways. I also don’t think people realize how mentally demanding riding a motorcycle is. I suspect that many people are flat out bored when riding in the car (maybe it’s just me?); I can only assume this is true considering all the stereos, DVD players, and cell phones used while driving. On a motorcycle I’m so focused on what’s happening all around me, time goes by very quickly, and I don’t feel distracted by the mundane activity of commuting (another reason I avoid the freeway, it lends itself to distraction of all parties involved). 
Beyond the feeling of the roadway ripping past your feet, many motorcyclists I’ve spoken with talk about a heightened sense of awareness or “being in the zone”. I don’t think that motorcyclists have super powers (or do I?…), but it’s merely that motorcyclists by the nature of the activity are almost completely engaged in the ride, feeling the engine, the road, the smell of burning brakes emanating from that car just ahead, and so on. Generally I believe this focus on survival forces many riders to notice subtle changes in traffic behavior, noticing pattern changes much further ahead, watching not only the car in front of them, but the two cars on front of that one.
Obviously not every rider’s experience is the same, but I suspect the NHTSA might want to look into the overall habits of riders, not just the dead and injured. On a similar note, I also suspect that an increasing number of riders are getting their endorsement through the Basic Rider Course (BRC) vs. taking the old school BMV exam. At the same time, I also suspect that more and more drivers are doing just the opposite, especially considering I paid $200 to go to driver’s education in 1999, but these days BRC in Ohio is only $50. In twenty years it will be interesting to see if the accident statistics are at all related as a result of training, and the lack thereof.
Despite all of my previous points, I suspect prospective new riders will be met with comments about the inherent dangers of motorcycles, simply considering the lack of protection. While it is true that motorcyclists are harshly exposed to the elements (and potentially the pavement…), the “anti-motorcyclist” may be discounting the maneuverability and power to weight advantages of the motorcycle. While cars are forced to slam on the brakes and potentially skid into an object, motorcycles may have opportunities to swerve or split lanes to avoid a crash. At the same time, Motorcycles have the ability to accelerate away from danger in a way that few cars can; it may be overly idealistic, but I suspect that sharp riders have huge advantages over cars in many situations.
Beyond lack of protection, I suspect some will say the in inclement weather, two wheels is simply not as good as four. Again, I can’t completely disagree, but modern motorcycle tires provide almost 80% grip in the rain as they do in dry conditions; I suspect that a competent rider with steady hands and a cool head can handle the worst conditions just fine. I will go on to say that I know riders who have legitimately traversed snow on a motorcycle; I also know people born and raised in Ohio who cower in fear of the “great white death” and refuse to drive in the snow; I’m just saying. I suppose I would also be remiss not to mention that most driver’s response to hitting a motorcyclist is “I never saw them”. As I said earlier, there are currently no statistics that I know of that describe the rider’s gear in an accident situation; 
was the rider wearing black leather, shorts and flip flops, or armored hi-visibility gear? On the same note (pun intended), there’s the whole “loud pipes save lives” crowd that is adamant that you can get drivers’ attention with the sound of your exhaust; while I won’t start that debate here, I will say we cannot prove or disprove the method based on these statistics. I’ve also heard the whole “wearing a helmet is just the difference between open and closed casket”; while I won’t spout statistics about helmet safety, I suspect that “the great unwashed” underestimates the durability and protection of modern motorcycle safety equipment. I also understand that leather jackets and helmets won’t protect you from a stop sign or a ravine, but an SUV won’t protect you from a semi, it’s just silly logic to dismiss riding under these premises.
From my perspective, the key to survival is vigilance, but that doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy yourself. I assume that some riders see helmets and armored jackets as a hassle or constraining. Obviously I’ve worn bullet proof vests with ceramic armor plates in 120 degree heat, so a motorcycle jacket is a small sacrifice to avoid skin grafts. That said, honestly the right gear is no inconvenience at all, but you have to make the investment and take the time. It’s understandable that taking ten minutes to get your gear on before each ride may be a hassle for some, but I suspect that choice may go (nearly) hand in hand with riders who drink, ride, and leave the helmet at home. 
Taking it a step further, imagine the benefits of taking a safety course on top of being a geared-up, seasoned rider? More than anything else, I honestly think that the average driver does not realize that they drive, and are surrounded by, two-ton killing machines; it’s not about the danger they pose to motorcycles, it’s that fact that I believe many people are naive to the dangers of the roadway, especially when it comes to passing SUVs and semi-tractor-trailers. What does that have to do with motorcycles? Savvy riders learn very quickly that riding next to another vehicle is potentially deadly, and therefore avoid that behavior, moreover often search for multiple escape avenues in the event of a “pinch”. It shocks me how often I watch traffic just ripping along, essentially “shoulder-to-shoulder” on the highway. As I said, this feeling of high alertness is of no consequence to me, but I suspect I may be jaded from my time in the military, where is becomes second nature. Motorcycling has been one of the greatest experiences in my life, but with that experience I accept the responsibility of constantly watching my back.
Ultimately I respect someone’s choice to ride or not, but I don’t think it’s right to condemn an activity under the premise that “statistics prove…” I suspect that in reality, the vast majority of motorcycle fatalities are careless young speed demons and old drunk guys. In the end, motorcycles may seem dangerous, but other daily activities are more deadly; as I said 4,735 pedestrians were killed in 2013, crosswalks are obviously “Death machines”.
Moto Adventurer 
This is a good, thorough analysis, Drew: well-researched.
It seems that certain underlying behaviors drive most such statistics: recklessness, impairment, and inexperience / lack of training. The reckless, impaired, and inexperienced / untrained rider putting himself at greater risk is the same individual that, behind the wheel of an automobile, would put motorcyclists at greater risk. Heck, that same person handling a firearm is likelier than a trained handler to injure or kill himself or another.
As you suggested, the solution is not in reducing the number of riders (I agree, there should be more, and they should ride more), but in enhancing the education for “dangerous” activities: better training for drivers and riders and maybe even for handlers of firearms.
Of course, these are just one fella’s opinions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ry thanks for reading! I’m obviously a proponent of choices, I wear a helmet, even though I don’t have to. That said, it just seems like the logical choice to me. I learned the ride the old fashioned way and took the test. The longer I rode the more I understood the threats and began making choices to improve my odds. I guess ultimately I hope folks take these words seriously and consider riding despite the “fear”; especially of it’s just because someone said it was “dangerous”. You hit the nail on the head, reckless people are just that; judging your choices based on theirs just doesn’t seem right to me. Be prepared and enjoy the ride!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another well written article, Drew.
I completely agree alcohol and motorcycles don’t mix (and that’s coming from a card carrying craft beer lover). An alcohol induced wobble or quick correction in a car is usually no big deal, but the same on two wheels likely means laying on the asphalt.
I’ve also seen the “over 40” fatality figures before. As a 55 year old who returned to motorcycles after a 20+ year layoff, I think that statistic is due primarily to the fact there are more older motorcyclists, as least here in SC. As an example, I recently attended Bike Week in Myrtle Beach for a couple of days and I’d venture 80% of riders were 35 or older. (Of course this is Harley country.) That’s also the trend I see on any given day in the SC Lowcountry. Kids aren’t exposed to dirt bikes like they were in the past – there’s less available land to ride and too many other distractions (TV, video games, organized sports, etc.) – so they never get the motorcycle “itch”. I know that was the case with my own children.
At any rate, keep up the good work and ride safe.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for reading Steve! Obviously I could pontificate for hours about the threats of drinking and speed combined with motorcycles but most people realize it’s a poor choice. I’m not a saint by any means but I try to practice some sense as “there’s a time and a place”. I honestly think that alcohol, helmets, and other safety gear is somewhat of an after thought for the older generation. The stereotypical cruiser rider unfortunately fits that bill as well. The joke in Ohio is that you might as well leave your helmet on your bike when you go inside, who the hell would steal it? That’s just how things were way back when so I get it. Ultimately I just want to point out that there’s a lot more about motorcycling that people may not realize. Good call in dirt bikes by the way, I hadn’t thought of that; obviously because I had video games and not a dirt bike (Sega was cheaper I guess…).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great article, Drew. I think you drove a point home when you said “here in the States, motorcycles are regarded as toys.” Very true. Why take a toy seriously if you’re just going out for a few hours with the guys on a Sunday? On the flip side, a car, for a large percentage of the American public, is just a means for getting from one place to another. With both those mindsets, why bother to get serious and learn how to efficiently and safely operate those vehicles and negotiate them through traffic via ongoing training? There is no incentive to do so, and that is where I feel the problem lies. Car manufacturers dummy down to the level of incompetence of the American driving public, thus the emphasis on “safety” rather than driving proficiency. Serious motorcyclists know that we must take responsibility for all other road users we engage with on the roads. Training, on both sides of the coin, is the solution. Plus getting back to the original premise that driving a motor vehicle is a privilege, not a right, contrary to popular belief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed Bob. Cheers to you sir, I think you’ve said it more eloquently than I could have.
LikeLike
Interesting read. I am all in favour of good quality clothing and “hi-vis” reflective gear. I have always believed that experience and thoughtful riding are a rider’s best defence but am conscious that a momentary lapse on a motorcycle can lead to far greater consequences than a mistake with a four wheel vehicle. Enjoyed reading this piece. I wish you safe motorcycling.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for reading Rambler! I’m pretty proud of this piece in particular, hoping it continues to get more traction. It sounds like we share similar mentality on riding, I try to be seen when I can, but assume I’m invisible to virtually everyone. You’re dead on, one second of lost focus could be your last. Safe travels! Cheers!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. Looking forward to reading more from you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m pretty busy with work at the moment but I see lots of new photos on the horizon. Please feel free to browse the categories on site, there’s quite a bit to see and read from 2015 until now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the informative article. It’s a lot of good information. A bit concerning for me is that you appear to be discounting the crash statistics for one reason or another, especially those that don’t have any correlation to cause (i.e. not wearing helmet, passengers versus drivers, age >40 years, prior license revocation, prior convictions, etc.). Although that may not have been your intention, it seems to be misleading the reader. You even compare motorcycle crash fatalities to pedestrian fatalities, without explaining the link or correlation between them, and without relevant context around the pedestrian fatalities. Given the number of people exposed to a roadway every day, is this even relevant? Similarly, the reference to speeding in fatal crashes does not appear to qualify whether either the motorcycle, or the car, or both were speeding. If the driver of the motorcycle was the speeder, would that minimize the risk? If the car was speeding would that make it more relevant?
Another concern is although many crashes don’t result in fatality, you seem to be very narrowly focused on the comparatively smaller number of fatal crashes versus the over 2-million crashes that were non-fatal. While interesting as a metric, it’s not very informative to a potential rider. The vast number of motorcycle crashes may not be fatal, as the metrics show, but many (probably most) end in a visit to the hospital, and often involve surgery and long-term recovery or permanent physical harm. Do these non-fatal crashes have less value or meaning to a potential rider?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Adam! These stats are obviously all based on National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) published statistics. You are actually calling out most of my intended points; the thesis of this whole spiel is actually the the statement “you are XX% more likely to be involved in a fatal crash on a motorcycle…” that I have read from multiple media outlets. My points mirror yours as these stats, and those articles, fail to answer the very questions you outlined. Good question with regard to speed, per your comments, the NHTSA stats of course do not provide any information on that topic. I assume, they were citing that the motorcycle was speeding prior to the accident, however those details are a bit nebulous, to say the least.
Agreed, I did not focus on the non-fatal accident rate of motorcyclists. I chose not to discuss that considering the statistics suggest that the overall accident rate of motorcyclists is actually comparable to the rate of automobile drivers (~1% if I recall, but I haven’t looked at the stats in some time). Your point may also be correct, of the accidents reported, it is probably safe to assume that injuries were more severe than an automobile accident. That said, I didn’t want to draw more false conclusions from otherwise incomplete statistics (i.e. what about non-reported incidents? Hospitalization rates? etc.), considering that was the entire premise of my entire “attack” on the “motorcycles are dangerous” statement.
In the end, I stand firm that automobiles and motorcycles are both dangerous. I will even hypothesize that “inattention” is probably the leading cause of accidents for both types of vehicles. Unfortunately, as you suggest, inattention on (or near) a motorcycle is probably the more hazardous alternative. I would assume that the best and safest motorcyclists are those that understand the dangers, and ride vigilant at all times. Moreover, I suspect that is actually what makes the largest difference between riders and drivers; I question the active vigilance of most commuters… but I digress.
I’m glad you’ve stumbled across the site! I hope you like what you find here!
LikeLike
Excellent article! Many good points and foodbfor rhought.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Robert! There are certainly inherent risks, but I think a limited few have successfully given motorcycles a bad reputation.
LikeLike
Pingback: VUZ LED Reflective Safety Vest: Be Seen | Moto Adventurer
Pingback: A Letter to the AMA: What is the Cost of Motorcycling? | Moto Adventurer
You aren’t 30% more likely to die on a motorcycle than a car, you are more than *30X* (30 *times*) more likely to die (per mile traveled) on a motorcycle than a car. That’s more than 3,000%. It’s ferociously dangerous. Even if skilled, conscientious riding reduced your risk by half (a huge reduction) it would still be more than 15X (1,500%) more dangerous than a car.
LikeLike
Thanks Jerry, good catch, “30x” was the intended message.
My argument is that there is no direct comparison between cars and motorcycles, yes they share the road, but the manner of which they’re used is completely different. The NHTSA may have average miles per year, but the sample size of motorcycles is extremely small compared to cars, and they do not publish the number of endorsed riders. There was something like 1.3 registered vehicles versus licensed drivers in 2016 (including motorcycles) but we have no idea what the breakdown of motorcycles to endorsed riders is. In both cases, I don’t think “average” miles traveled is a correct correlation to make because motorcycles are recreational vehicles; many people have multiple bikes (as with cars), and many motorcycles haven’t gone anywhere for years. It’s apples and oranges and it’s a horrible way to make an argument that “motorcycles are dangerous”. Yes, motorcycles are dangerous, but the basis by which they make the claim that they’re 30 times more dangerous is a weak analogy. It might be more comparable to draw that correlation to bicyclists or pedestrians. Motorcyclists as a whole are unfortunately not very well trained (here in the US), and ultimately motorcycles are, as you say, ferociously unforgiving.
LikeLike
Pingback: VUZ LED Reflective Safety Vest: Be Seen | Moto Adventurer
You have to accept it. Motorcycles are more dangerous than cars. And motorcycles cannot evade trouble as well as cars. I drive both and you have more realistic options in a car than you do on a motorcycle. And in the end you are much more protected in the car than a motorcycle. I just feel that when people make the argument that motorcycles are safer or more maneuverable than cars, that just sets up naive riders for disaster. The message should be that motorcycles are more dangerous and thus you should drive more responsibly and carefully. But I am no fool. A lot of riders are attracted to the risk and naturally, they take even more risks. For awhile.
LikeLike
It’s really hard to assess and compare risks of the various activities for an individual let alone extract usable information for statistics. Each person has different behaviors and reasons for the behaviors. I have a history of dangerous activities: motorcycling, bicycling, flying, and driving.
I rode a motorcycle as a commuter and on solo trips in the early 90s for a few years because it was exciting and solved the city parking problem. I was based out of San Diego, with fairly heavy traffic. During those years of daily motorcycling, I never had a collision. I dropped the motorcyle once on gravel and hurt only my pride. However, I felt like I had many close calls.
Also, I’ve commuted on bicycle for years and still ride for recreation nearly every day. I’ve crashed frequently. However, these are always slow speed crashes. I’ve never been hurt. On the bicycle, I try to stay out of the cars’ path of travel. I’m off to the side. Granted if one hits me, it would be bad. Because of that sense of risk, I no longer commute by bicycle.
I also fly a small airplane a few times a month. This is purely recreational. I never have to fly. If I’m tired, or don’t feel like it, or if the winds are wrong or if the visibility is low, I don’t go, period. I feel I keep this activity pretty safe. Crashes are rare and can range from no injury to fatal. Depending on the G-force involved or if there is fire. For example, in the unlikely event the engine quits, I would not lose control. I would glide unharmed into a field or highway. Airplane engines almost never quit. However, if I were to collide with another plane, the chances are high both planes would lose control at altitude and no one would survive. This is unlikely, but possible.
I’ve crashed my car a few times over the years. I was never hurt, and neither was anyone else. However, I feel I must drive. I have to get to work, no matter the conditions. This makes the chance of crashing the car someday pretty high. Cars are very safe, nowadays, so I don’t fear getting hurt, unless in a high speed collision. I’m careful when I drive, but I do it a lot, like most of us. I can get distracted, as driving is so repetitive. The chances are high that I will crash again someday, but the chance of crashing on any given day is almost zero. The chance of getting hurt in a typical crash is very low.
I rank my chances of crashing to be: 1. bicycling; 2. car driving; 3. motorcycling; 4. flying
I rank my chances of getting hurt in a crash: 1. motorcycling; 2. flying; 3. bicycling; 4. car driving.
LikeLike
Thanks for reading and commenting Geoff. This article is pretty dated at this point, but the stats are still surprisingly relevant. I believe most recent stats have cars involved in the majority of motorcyclist fatalities, whereas it was just barely the minority before. These stats will become even more interesting in coming years as COVID has changed the motorcycle population significantly if I believe what I’m hearing.
My attitude is still similar to when I wrote this. Motorcycles aren’t inherently dangerous, but they are extremely unforgiving. We’ve legislated and funded forgiveness into automobiles. My life has been significantly impacted by a car accident, albeit, technology has significantly improved since 1989. Airbag jackets and whatnot are also a very valid option now for motorcyclists, something else that was pretty rare when this was written.
At any rate, your points are valid. As far as my view is concerned, I don’t want people to subscribe to “don’t try that activity it’s dangerous” to this hobby or any other for they matter. Life is terminal. People shouldn’t let the Ignorant impact their own risk tolerance. Motorcycles lack advanced safety features and some motorcyclists lack attention, skill, and risk assessment abilities. While not “as deadly” behind the wheel of a car, the pilot is still the riskiest part of the formula.
LikeLike
Yes Sir, five years on and your article is still being read! You made a good point and I agree. Motorcycling can be worth the risk in a personal risk/benefit ratio, especially since risks can be partly mitigated by modern gear (Kevlar clothes, better helmets), better training (MSF and advanced), mindset (conservative, no show boating). I think you’re right about collisions with cars in intersections being the biggest risk on a motorcycle and that was what was taught at the MSF class. My 18-year-old daughter just completed MSF and she now has her M on her license. I was searching for articles about motorcycle safety because I want her to be safe. Thank you the thought provoking article.
LikeLike
If nothing else, I can run my trap and ask questions! Thanks for reading!
LikeLike
Good analysis.
It comes down to this: if you don’t drink and ride (or ride high), try to avoid riding at night, attend safety training, do some track days to improve braking and cornering skills, have a “safety” or “what if…” attitude, and wear all the gear all the time, then your chances are a lot better than the stats.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Staying Safe on Your Motorcycle November 2 – UTA Radio