Comments on: Motorcycle Anti Lock Brakes May Become Mandatory

By: john

john — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:54:41 +0000

The electronics did not shut the Engines on the Hudson river aircraft down.
Mechanical damage from birds did. In fact an electronicly controlled engine is more likely to keep running after serious compressor damage.

By: talvod

talvod — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:48:42 +0000

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:07:40 +0000

My last bike was totalled because it didn’t have ABS. My next bike will have ABS. Unfortunately, that will be a little while because my last bike wasn’t the only thing that got broken.

Realistically, if you are cut off suddenly enough you won’t have time to even think about anything fancy like a controlled slide or progressively applying your front brake. It will be STOP NOW. And if you don’t hit the car first you _will_ go down and lose the last 15-20 feet of braking distance. In our case (my wife and I) that lost 15 feet likely made the difference between walking away from the crash and a lengthy convalescence.

Government legislation wouldn’t affect my use of ABS – but it would give me a much bigger selection of ABS bikes to choose from. And for all the elitist riders out there, there will be plenty of grandfathered used bikes to tune your finely honed braking skills on for years to come.

By: nobody

nobody — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:56:50 +0000

“Philosophically, I would like to agree with those who believe that we should have choices in our selection of risk, but I also believe that some risks apply not just to the individual, but cause enough harm to society in general that limited controls must be placed on individuals.”

Then all motorcycles should be outlawed, right? Or at least superbikes should be outlawed, right? The IIHS tried to do just that recently – they even had statistics (with GRAPHS!) to support it. How can you argue against GRAPHS? Think of the GRAPHS!

I happen to like ABS. I also know that when the IIHS is up to something, it isn’t for my good.

By: scritch

scritch — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:50:35 +0000

j huettl: Riding side-by-side is dangerous in ideal conditions. What were you doing riding side-by-side in the rain? If you had been riding in a staggered formation, one of you would have probably had much more time to brake safely, instead of both of you having to apply emergency braking AND cope with not having enough room to maneuver on one side.

jack swartz: So, you are not in favor of mandatory food inspection? Or mandatory hand-washing by the guy who makes your hamburger?

Knee-jerk reactions to perceived taking of liberties and extrapolation to the general from personal experience are not valid ways to reduce harm to a population. Philosophically, I would like to agree with those who believe that we should have choices in our selection of risk, but I also believe that some risks apply not just to the individual, but cause enough harm to society in general that limited controls must be placed on individuals. Would you like your next door neighbor to be able to store 5 tons of black powder in his garage? After all, shouldn’t it be his choice to take that risk?