Sig

Members
  • Content count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

78 Excellent

About Sig

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. hahaha I expected something ridiculous along these lines... Keep it up! Or quit while you're ahead... Oops! too late! USA roads are different... that's so funny you actually made me laugh out loud. I won't bother refuting that one, it's too hilarious. You don't seem to understand the difference between 'speed' and 'speeding'! Speed limits are set for the conditions/environment (so, if the roads are different the limit is set differently! hahaha the roads are different! I'm still laughing). If speed killed, we'd all be dead. It is completely nonsensical crap sloganeering propaganda. It reminds me of the idiot liberal politicians who wanted to outlaw bullets because they are dangerous and they kill people! The imbeciles who talk about 'speed kills' in this article are a bunch of numbskulls. And it wasn't a 'nice try' on my part, but a massive amount of research over many years by many very experienced people who made this 'nice try'. You can believe which ever idiot jumping out in a news article you like, up to you. I'd prefer to go with decades of proven research. Common sense is nice too... but apparently it isn't too common in some people's destiny! Truly sorry if I am too condescending, but it is just so insanely funny. Kinda like explaining something to a 5 year old that he has no experience to comprehend and asks very cute and funny questions that make you laugh and know that no matter how much you try to explain, he just won't get it. In the end, I'm sure you're a nice guy and very sincere. But in this one.... sorry, you are dead wrong. But go ahead and argue... I'm done.
  2. Over about a 20 year period of collecting stats on speed limit changes in America, 70's to 90's, a variety of studies showed that the lowering and raising of speed limits (for ALL vehicles) did not give statistically reliable data to prove that reducing the speed limits reduced fatalities. With all of the various studies done, there may have been a negligible number less fatalities, but the studies couldn't come up with anything to really show this would be any kind of significant help at all. The limits have only gone up since then. And isn't it Germany that has the famed Autobahn with no limit? I'm assuming for motorcycles too... They have quite good safety records on their roads, seemingly regardless of these high speeds. It's all about the environment, this includes road conditions, types of roads, location of roads, weather, etc etc..., and the level of stupidity of the drivers who are or are not adhering to common sense, not to mention posted limits, and driving in a manner not suited to the environment or their abililty. Reducing speed limits for motorcycles would not make a significant difference in fatalities. It is common sense and it has also been proven in extensive studies. And I believe it would make the roads less safe having different speed limits for different vehicles on the same road, with exceptions for restricted areas like steep inclines (again, common sense). It is the difference of speeds between vehicles that proves to be disaster waiting to happen. That's why there are minimum speed laws and also laws for not going with the flow of traffic because creating too much of a difference of speed between vehicles on the same road is dangerous. Maybe these laws aren't in Thailand though.... and even if they were... does anyone care?
  3. Well... it's better than an increase! The stats on higher number of accidents as well as higher number of injuries go hand in hand. But with fewer fatalities... makes me wonder if maybe a bit more people were wearing helmets than last year. A helmet could keep them from dying, but still be injured. This could create such a stat. So could seat belt usage. But motorcycle fatalities are a huge part of the equation. Keep increasing helmet usage and decreasing other various stupidity and the next thing you know, there'll be significant change! Oh.... hmmm... I almost forgot where I am! There's always hoping! Isn't there? maybe...? please....
  4. hahaha Maybe he just rolled the window down? Why go to the trouble of forcing a door open? Even if the window wouldn't roll down, it would be a lot easier to break a window to get out than find some high priced special machine to pry open a door.... bulletproof glass!?? hahaha Not intending to laugh at you derogatorily. Just seems funny to miss a simple thing like that. Not that I haven't done so myself plenty of times
  5. Definitely impossible to judge from this article. And the same goes with how loud the bike was. A perfectly 'quiet' motorcycle coming around a corner and suddenly facing a small herd of elephants, at who knows what distance, in a very quiet national park, could very well have been 'loud' to the elephants, but normal or even quiet to what any city dweller would judge it. 'Loud' is very subjective. And for all we know, the author of the article is completely incorrect about the sound of the motorcycle as the cause for the charge. They may have been spooked suddenly with a bike coming around a corner at 50 kph, or just about any speed, as they were meandering along in the jungle/forest. There are all sorts of reasons why they may have reacted that have nothing to do with sound. And if any were in musth, the best anyone could do is get the hell away immediately no matter what. They can go from seemingly docile to a raging charge without any provocation whatsoever.
  6. The sad reality is that in this country, it may very well have been properly permitted and inspected. When I say 'properly', I mean legally on the up and up. But that doesn't mean that those who approve permits nor inspectors are any more competent than the designers/architects and electricians! The owner of the joint could have done everything he knows to do properly, but served by inept idiots who sell their services well. But of course there are more than plenty of what you mentioned around, no doubt! Just can't be so sure about this specific place....
  7. hahahaha I sure hope nobody thought I was serious!
  8. Is there another article written somewhere that you all are reading??? You all seem to have an amazing ability to garner incredible detail that isn't in the posted article! The article says But no... somehow it gets changed into.... But somehow, you know that he didn't implore his wife to go 'this way' where we can get shelter, but she ran in another direction, maybe into an open field... who knows. Maybe he even tried to grab her to get her to go the right way, but she panicked and tore away from him into an insane direction. What's he supposed to do, commit suicide and follow her? He could have struggled with her until the very last second possible... nobody knows. What's he supposed to do, fight 6 elephants? Such great armchair valiant warriors fighting for women, give me a break. The article says... But no... somehow it gets changed into.... They were driving on a road through a national park. Where does one get the idea that they thought it was cool to approach elephants at all? The article says they stopped when they saw the elephants. It isn't clear exactly when or where he stopped, let alone what he thought is cool or that he approached the elephants after seeing them at all. It doesn't take an excessively loud bike to be considered 'noisy' in such a place, especially to elephants! Elephants charge nice and quiet cars as well! I've even seen one do in a vehicle with it's engine off and the occupants whispering to each other. There is no evidence from the article that the bike was modified or louder than any other bike on the road anywhere. This guy could be a great honorable guy. And in his grief all he gets from TVers is ripped to shreds mercilessly out of pure 100% ignorance as to who he is or if he did anything remotely wrong. I don't get it why there is so much of this crap in TV. And I read so much about how stupid Thai people are?? It appears to me that there are a lot of TV members who need to take a long look in a mirror!
  9. I highly doubt it could be possible in Thailand. I'm sure there are very strict regulations in place preventing such things!
  10. Makes me remember being on a motorcycle taxi with the guy answering his phone with one hand while smoking with the other! Your comment about the motorcycle safety course is a good one. I took a course like that back home some 35 years ago. It was VERY worthwhile. I would even recommend it for people who have been riding recreationally for less than 3 years or so. Experienced dirt bike riders could even benefit a bit. If it is a good course, you will learn things that you never thought of before. I don't recall exactly, but I believe the course was about a one week deal for a few hours a day. At the very least, a shortened safety course (5-10 hours) would be a good and reasonable requirement prior to getting a motorcycle license. And it would be an excellent penalty for any motorcycle safety infraction (no helmet, no light, speeding, etc).
  11. You are very apparently not an experienced motorcycle rider or you would know better. I'm not gonna waste my time finding links to dependable stats for you. You probably wouldn't believe them anyway because they definitely don't support your curious ideas, not by a long shot. Believe it or not, there has been quite a bit of research done on motorcycle accidents and safety. You pretty much made one of my points in what you say about racing at 100 Kph ("exceeding the safe speed for the environment that is the problem"). "Racing" (or traveling) at 100 Kph on a road that is an open motorway wouldn't be a problem since that is a pretty normal speed for such a road, but on other roads, it would be begging for an accident and one with many obstacles. In such an environment this speed gives a higher chance to also impact an obstacle with your body, which is not the case on an open motorway where you can crash at high speed and not be so likely to impact any obstacle. That's why many high speed crashes don't result in death if the driver is properly attired and helmeted. I guess you haven't experienced a high speed crash... I have and also have known a good number of guys who have. You apparently have also never watched motorcycle racing.... 90% huh?... so cute
  12. Laying a motorcycle down or crashing at well over 120 kph, let alone 90, is easily survivable with a quality helmet and happens regularly. And if other proper gear is worn, one can walk away from it without even needing medical treatment. The exact same scenario without a helmet would very likely be fatal. More than high speed, it is exceeding the safe speed for the environment that is the problem. Doing 50 in a zone where one should be doing 30 is pretty much as dangerous as doing 90 in a 50 zone. But doing 90 on a highway is pretty much as safe as doing 30 downtown. Alcohol is a major contributor of motorcycle deaths as well, somewhere between 25-30% of fatal accidents if I remember correctly. An interesting tidbit that I can't seem to forget.... in America the stats showed that States that did NOT have helmet laws have had a bit more than 10 times the fatality rate compared to States with helmet laws! 10 times!! If it isn't already obvious to someone the difference helmets make, that stat should open their eyes.
  13. Makes me want to slap those parents silly too! They obviously helped get their kids off the hook. Disgusting. God help my kid if he ever did something like that because God's help is all he's gonna get! People DIED!! And these people don't hardly seem to give a damn.
  14. Helmets alone would probably halve that figure. But with the 200 baht crap helmets that are legal here... maybe not, but would still be significant. If there were laws for helmet quality standards and the wearing of them enforced with bike confiscation (5,000 to get it back), I'm pretty sure deaths could be halved very quickly. Won't happen of course... I used the L word and the E word... Law and Enforcement (Taboo in Thailand) In the end, it all boils down to the driver. Not laws, not enforcement, not manufacturers. Just simple, common sense, Responsibility. Oops, there I go again with another taboo... I used the R word
  15. Yes, Or maybe sand or dirt on the road... I don't think the bike is the problem. The Click is a very popular bike. I don't imagine it would be so if it were inherently dangerous.