[ProllyInfamous]

The wrecklessness which brings some people into prison, is what brings them & others lusting towards motorcycle culture, often shortly upon release. Something something something anti-social something.

I'm just offering real-world advice after witnessing all the broken bones and jerked roadrash upon this tattoo'd convict's broken body. Shouldn't be alive.

[coldtea]

Billions of people have a motorcycle globally... Some anecdote from a chronically motorcycle adverse culture (US) doesn't mean a whole mean of transport is invalid...

[estearum]

Most people riding motorcycles globally are not doing so on busy freeways at 60mph+ multiple times per day, surrounded by 2.5 ton vehicles with poor visibility traveling 60mph+

Putzing around an urban center on a cafe bike is not what it means to "ride a motorcycle" in the US.

[whartung]

I'd much rather be on a freeway at 60+ MPH surrounded by 2.5 ton vehicles with poor visibility than riding an urban street. New riders are rightly intimidated by the freeways (they're fast, they're big), but they're far, far safer than the street with all of the starting, stopping, hard corners, folks turning onto the street, and, of course, the king of bike slayers, the "I didn't see them" left turn.

Not to mention all the junk on the streets: the oil, anti-freeze, gravel, wet painted turn arrows.

When freeways become unsafe is when the loose nut behind the handlebars decides to wick it up and just "go around all of these big slow things". But that's not the freeways fault.

First year/10,000 miles is the hardest. But the foundational rules apply: Wear the gear, slow down, don't ride impaired (drunk, high, tired...).

Lightning strikes, it sucks. But, anecdotally, my worst motor vehicle injury was while a passenger in a modern car when my friend drove into a left turning vehicle. "Fender bender", "no biggie". Chronic, notable, back pain ever since. Worst than anything I've ever suffered on a motorcycle.

[estearum]

You're describing American cities, while GP (to whom I was responding) was clearly describing the huge number of foreign cities (e.g. SE Asia) where motorcycles are the dominant form of urban transit.

The relevant factor is that a street where motorcycles, cycles, pedestrians, and small/slow cars are dominant – all of which move at generally slow speeds – is of far, far, far less danger than a street (freeway or not) where the primary form factor is large automobiles traveling quickly.

You're describing American cities, while GP (to whom I was responding) was clearly describing the huge number of foreign cities (e.g. SE Asia) where motorcycles are the dominant form of urban transit.

The relevant factor is that a street where motorcycles, cycles, pedestrians, and small/slow cars are dominant – all of which move at generally slow speeds – is of far, far, far less danger than a street (freeway or not) where the primary form factor is large automobiles traveling quickly.

> First year/10,000 miles is the hardest

This is typical Intermediate Syndrome. The median rider involved in a motorcycle accident has nearly 3 years of experience.

No, road defects, obstacles, and weather are almost never the cause of motorcycle accidents.

[decimalenough]

I lived in Bangkok and saw 4 motorcycle accidents or their immediate aftermath. Even in perpetually jammed third world megacity traffic, the motorcyclist always loses to the other vehicle, in several of those cases almost certainly fatally.

[KingMob]

I guess this depends on whether you're emphasizing deadliness or likelihood.

I live in Thailand, and I can assure you that while scooters dominating city streets increases awareness by car drivers, it doesn't make accidents less likely.

Most accidents worldwide happen on low-speed streets, not highways. On highways, the speeds are higher, so the rare accidents that occur are more damaging, but the opportunities for accidents are also much, MUCH lower. (No/few turns, no/few stops, similar speed levels, better visibility, etc.)

[mothballed]

First 10k are the hardest but the tail effect of an experienced rider is what gets you. I had crashes in my first 10k but my worst were after riding for decades when I would just randomly hit a tiny oil slick going 70+mph while using zero brakes, zero turning, and zero extra acceleration. Just get thrown low-side due to randomness of having to watch traffic while not noticing a tiny oil slick with enough random variations in the road that it immediately throws the bike when traction regains.

[qmr]

> chronically adverse culture

That's the thing. On a bike you can do everything right and still lose.

California is one of the safer places to ride given how many bikes are here and I've still had too many near misses as a trained, experienced, and conservative rider.

Most people put 1-2k miles a year on their bikes, when I was riding often I put on 2-3k/ month.

[coldtea]

>That's the thing. On a bike you can do everything right and still lose.

Same with anything in life.

Same with a car, just less so. Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7 (and can still die from any number of things anyway).

At some point there's a tradeoff people make. Some people make it where the tradeoff slider says "motorcycle", rather than stop at "car". And I'm not talking a tiny niche, but about 1-1.2 billion people globally.

[Falimonda]

The risk is much much much higher with a motorcycle - especially in the US where most car drivers have next to zero experience sharing the road with motorcycles let alone driving a motorcycle. Saying it's the same thing is absurd here.

- Licensed motorcycle driver

[mothballed]

Vs what though? We're talking about a felon and addict channeling their risk-taking energy. I rode motorcycles exclusively as my transport in my 20s and it was one of the main things that checked use of intoxicants. You need your balance for a motorcycle and it uses the same risk-taking energy that many people would otherwise channel into drugs and destruction.

That is to say, those comparing car v motorcycle are doing the wrong comparison here. You'd be evaluating (car + substitute activity of drugs/crime/etc) vs. motorcycle -- rather than merely car v motorcycles.

[Falimonda]

Motorcycles are not sobriety tests...

[paulryanrogers]

> Same with a car, just less so.

So not the same?

> Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7

Quite an extreme and useless comparison. There's a large spectrum of transportation and entertainment options between motorcycle riding and home bound bumper suit at all times.

[coldtea]

>So not the same?

Does it have to be the same?

Do you discourage people from riding bicycles too, lest they be hit?

[paulryanrogers]

> Does it have to be the same?

If someone uses the word 'same' followed by a 'but' for a significantly different case then the word 'same' is losing its meaning.

> Do you discourage people from riding bicycles too, lest they be hit?

I don't, and my point is these things all have wildly different cost-benefit tradeoffs. So it's unproductive to jump to some extreme risk averse example that no one was suggesting or implying.

[estearum]

Yeah exactly, same with BASE jumping or wingsuiting.

It's the same risk dynamic as driving a car to work, just more so. Of course you could also stay at home, wearing protective bumper suit 24/7 (and can still die from any number of things anyway).

[embedding-shape]

> That's the thing. On a bike you can do everything right and still lose.

Same with a car, or anything really.

The point of parent stands, globally there are billions of people going through their lives with motorcycles as their main vehicles, yet aren't involved in any life-changing accidents.

Some places are more dangerous than others, probably places that doesn't have this already motorcycle-heavy culture, like other countries in the world, has a higher incident rate and more severe accidents, as drivers aren't aware of how motorcycles usually operate.

[robobro]

I live in Indonesia. We have the highest per-capita rate of bike ownership in the world.

I have seen what happens to motorcycle riders when there are accidents and I have seen what happens to car drivers when there are accidents. I won't get into the gory details but I avoid using bikes as much as possible.

[embedding-shape]

And I've seen what happens when pedestrians get hit by a car going way too fast, it sucks, and is horrible, but also besides the point. Not to say one has worse/better accidents, motorcycles accidents obviously has a much higher fatality and serious injuries risk, hard to deny.

[ProllyInfamous]

>but also besides the point.

Hard disagree.

Both pedestrians and motorcyclists are raw to the elements, entirely. At least when on roadways an automobile provides a chassis/rollcage.

[qmr]

Crashes. Not accidents.

[coldtea]

Accidents. Not everything is under the driver's control, nor does it happen due to their intention (or even necessarily due to their lack of attention or whatever).

There's a reason the term accident is used (I know at least 10 countries where the meaning is the same).

[qmr]

Please don't say accident when you really mean crash.

Promote language of responsibility and accountability.

[embedding-shape]

Most crashes, but not all, are accidents. I think I'm talking about accidents, not crashes.

[qmr]

Someone is always at fault.

Look into auto lobby and this "accident" term history.

Use the language of accountability.

[stickfigure]

Get a dirt bike. 10X more fun than street riding and much safer.

[calmbonsai]

The issue is the bodily risk of injury or death compared to nearly any other routine transportation or sporting activity: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/road-users/motorcy...

[newaccountman2]

A fairly large % of those people--I would wager most, personally--would probably rather have cars, but can't afford to.

[klibertp]

Probably depends on the locale. In Europe, riding a moped in a big city is a way to drastically cut your commute compared to driving a car. It's not exactly dangerous when all the other road users are moving at 5m/min, and being able to just skip all the traffic jams is a godsend. By car, my trip to the office was about 45min - it was 15min on a moped, a stop at a shop for some snacks included. And that's with riding speed never exceeding 50km/h.

I had two accidents during my 5 years of commuting, and both times I only got minor scratches and had to replace my shoes. Both happened at speeds a determined bicycle rider could achieve, but I suspect I wouldn't be as well protected on a bicycle (both the machine itself and the protective gear tend to be much lighter there than on a moped). If I needed to do that again, I'd buy a model with two wheels at the front, which would have prevented both accidents - though I'm not sure if added stability wouldn't encourage me to ride faster.

So it's pretty specific, but if you're somewhere where driving culture is not too cutthroat, the roads can support single-track vehicles, and the traffic rather than actual distance is the limiting factor - owning a bike can be an objectively better option.

[newaccountman2]

oh interesting, I should have realized it was fairly common in Europe

[coldtea]

In Europe many people have both, and use the motorcycle to go to work/etc because it's faster and more convenient, especially in a larger city with traffic jams.

[tom86150]

I am going to get to work with my classic Vespa scooter. Its cheaper than a car and i live only 7 kms away from my workplace. Riding bus and tram is time consuming and expensive. Its fun to ride a classic scooter and it never failed so far because i use it everyday. My classic runs up to 70km/h and people think its a slow, modern scooter so they dont really pay attention to me.

[ProllyInfamous]

>Riding bus is time consuming and expensive.

I've always thought it made more sense that instead of large metrobuses the local transit authority operate more like a locals-only taxiservice – similar to their already-existant handicapped-access services (which send a solitary transport driver, with ramped single-occupant van/vehicle).

[komali2]

And thank God for it.

If every scooter rider in Taipei had a car, the city traffic would move a meter a day.

It's also about convenience, btw, not just cost. It's basically impossible to park a car here. Scooters are also difficult but at least possible.

A huge chunk of people here just take public transit now, as it should be.

[ProllyInfamous]

Part of the reason for "US culture" (specifically: not walking mostly) is that zoning laws largely prevent over/under residential/storefront construction.

This makes everything so far apart as to make walking inconvenient. Add in unbearable weather for half of most years (whether hot/cold), and it just isn't convenient to grab something "on a quick walk" from the grocery store that is miles away from most homes.

Thankfully (some) cities are beginning to realize this, and are changing (IMHO: stupid) zoning/regulations. My favorite example has been of my own hometown's (Austin) reduction in required parking spaces for most commercial activities. This increases density, and encourages more walking. ATX's buslane-onlies leave a lot to be desired... but at least they've gotten rid of (most) downtown oneways.

[sgt]

I'm a motorcyclists. We usually refer to the smaller bikes as "motorbikes". Two wheels in the west is usually a hobby. In other parts of the world it might be a necessity, they don't do it for the pleasure. A lot of people forget this.

[senectus1]

yeah I think you have PTSD from your friends accident.

Not all bike owners and riders have a shady history or risk taking behavior (aside from riding a motrobike).