Motorcycle GDL & Mandatory Training

[antichrysler]

Anti chrysler - your dead wrong.   sk-bandit is right.   just because your comfortable does not make you safe. in fact - it probably makes you more dangerous.
self delusion will literally get you killed. period.

I still think with enough practice you will be a safe rider.

[cowboyrt]

And if you think your just hurting yourself, think of the person who's car you just smoked off, or the person that watches you ragdoll down the highway, the emergency people who take ya to hospital, the nurses who have to clean your infected burns, your family who is worried about you and taking care of your cat and house while in the hospital (provided they're not planning a funeral) and then every other rider who plates a bike that now has to pick up the tab.

[antichrysler]

And if you think your just hurting yourself, think of the person who's car you just smoked off, or the person that watches you ragdoll down the highway, the emergency people who take ya to hospital, the nurses who have to clean your infected burns, your family who is worried about you and taking care of your cat and house while in the hospital (provided they're not planning a funeral) and then every other rider who plates a bike that now has to pick up the tab.

You're completely missing the point.  If you choose to risk doing that, it's your decision to make.  People are given the option of making bad decisions everyday, why should this be any different?  The person that you're hurting the most by not taking the course is yourself.  If something happens, will it affect the paramedics, nurses, doctors, and family members involved?  Absolutely.  At the end of the day it's not my problem if joe blow goes and buys a liter bike and wins a Darwin award.  There's a course available, joe blow decided he didn't need it, and now joe blow has paid the price.  

I'm all for GDL, just not forcing a safety course.  The people that want to become better and safer riders will take it regardless of if there's a law that forces them.  

Rather than forcing someone to take a safety course I would rather see better laws to punish people that ride and drive like a tool.  Whether that be joe blow with a liter bike, or someone driving their car like an idiot.

[Josh]

I still think with enough practice you will be a safe rider.

As a brand new rider, how do you know to practice the right things? How do you know to practice emergency braking, emergency swerving, slow speed maneuvers, clutch control? I'll tell ya, when I learned to ride, I didn't even know what these things were let alone practicing them before I got my licence. All I was concerned about was knowing what I had to know in order to pass my test and get my M.

Places like the SSBA are good information warehouses that can inform new riders that they ought to be teaching themselves these things. Also, if you were pushed to ride by a friend who is safety conscious, then perhaps they would tell you. But more often than not, neither of these things are up in your face early in your riding career. That's why SSBA needs to get out there more, and into the dealerships to provide vital information to help these new riders.

Practice always makes perfect... IF you are practicing all the right things.

[Josh]

You're completely missing the point.  If you choose to risk doing that, it's your decision to make.  The people that you're hurting the most by not taking the course are the people you're closest to.  That's all I said this whole time.  At the end of the day it's not my problem if joe blow goes and buys a liter bike and wins a Darwin award.  There's a course available, joe blow decided he didn't need it, and now joe blow has paid the price. 

I'm not debating whether or not the course improves someones ability to ride a bike.  I'm only debating whether or not it should be mandatory.  The people that want to become better and safer riders will take it regardless of if there's a law that forces them.  I'm all for GDL, just not forcing a safety course.

Rather than forcing someone to take a safety course I would rather see better laws to punish people that ride and drive like a tool.

You're missing a whole dimension here man. There's a lot more people paying the price because Joe Blow decided not to take the course... literally. It's been said time and time again, our rates keep going up because of the number of motorcycle accidents. Did your plates go up this year (aside from you buying a new bike)? Why do you think that happened?

You can't go out and buy a firearm without any training and just "risk" it. Why? Because there are laws and people that govern it. Just like SGI governs the roads and highways that you wish to operate on.

Taken from www.canadianlawsite.ca... see the very first requirement:

Requirement to Own a Firearm

Anyone in Canada who owns or wants to own a firearm must do the following:

   1.      Take the Canadian Firearms Safety Course (CFSC);
   2.      Pass the the CGSC test, or show that they have already taken the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and passed the test (good for life, unless the applicant is later subject to a prohibition order); or
   3.      Pass (or have already passed) the test without taking the course; or show that they have taken a course before January 1, 1995, approved by the Attorney General of Manitoba or Quebec; or
   4.      Have a Chief Firearms Officer certify that their knowledge of firearms laws and safe handling practices meets the standards set out in the Regulations (only for adults who have owned a firearm since January 1, 1979).
   5.      Obtain a licence. This law became effective December 1, 1998. Prior to that date in order to purchase and own a firearm one must have had a FAC. "FAC" stands for Firearms Acquisition Certificate. It was the certificate needed to get a firearm before December 1, 1998. As long as they are valid, FACs can act as licences.

Firearms can kill, just like motorcycles can kill. The idea of training being mandatory seems like a no brainer to me.

[olchap]

Make it mandatory.

I still wont have to do it. I made sure to get my full license before this gdl came in to place. In any case, it wont hurt anyone having to actually learn how to drive their bike.

[GMCdriver]

There are a lot of people who only learn what they have to to pass the test and in my opinion that just means that we need to consider making the test harder, making it include the kind of safety things that we want people to know.  Then a lot of people will go out and learn even more "just to pass the test", heck if we make the test hard enough, most people will opt to take training just to make sure that can pass it.

The gun thing you posted kinda makes my point if you read the second line or the third line of your quote.
2.     Pass the the CGSC test, or show that they have already taken the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and passed the test
3.      Pass (or have already passed) the test without taking the course
You don't have to take the course if you can pass the test.

[antichrysler]

The gun thing you posted kinda makes my point if you read the second line or the third line of your quote.
2.      Pass the the CGSC test, or show that they have already taken the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and passed the test
3.      Pass (or have already passed) the test without taking the course
You don't have to take the course if you can pass the test.

I agree with this.  I think implementing a GDL and perhaps making the road test more difficult is a better solution.  I personally don't think the road test is difficult enough for a car or a bike.  Road test in a car doesn't check for your ability to drive a manual (many people take their road test in an automatic and then purchase a manual after), it doesn't test your ability to drive in low visibility conditions, your ability to drive in icy conditions, and the list goes on and on.  Same thing goes for a motorcycle, they check a few basic things and award you a license.

As for the rates going up, they went up because of a rate re-balance implemented by SGI.  It's a nice way of saying "overall we made money, but we didn't make money on each individual category so lets raise the ones we didn't make money on".  Unfortunately that was motorcycles.  The majority of our rate increase is due to that.  If we want to lower our insurance costs we should conduct more research of the circumstances surrounding these claims.  If the claims were due to poor training, offer a discount if you complete the safety course.  If the claims were due to driving like a tool, update the policy that says if you drive like a tool you won't have coverage.  Case and point the guy going over 200km/hr down Idlwyld in Saskatoon last year, why are we insuring this person when they are intentionally endangering themselves. 

At the end of the day it's not a matter of how you gained the knowledge, but whether or not you have it. 

[cowboyrt]

Your sooo not getting it.....

[cowboyrt]

Alot of crashes, and deaths, were not because the person was riding like an idiot. they found them selves in a situation they didn't know how to handle. as a result something bad happened.
And why are our rates going up? Because per capita (josh help me out here) bikes have the highest number of claims, and those claims are way more expensive in comparision to 4 wheeled veichles.   do you really know the costs involved??

[olchap]

Alot of crashes, and deaths, were not because the person was riding like an idiot. they found them selves in a situation they didn't know how to handle. as a result something bad happened.
And why are our rates going up? Because per capita (josh help me out here) bikes have the highest number of claims, and those claims are way more expensive in comparision to 4 wheeled veichles.   do you really know the costs involved??

If they are going to force the course on us, they can also give a discount if we have it.

I'm not too unhappy with my insurance. My car actually costs more...

[claffix]

If they are going to force the course on us, they can also give a discount if we have it.

I'd definitely take a course if it meant a break on my insurance rates.  I think the way to do this is to make the course optional with discounts for completing it.  That way you're gonna get training for the guys who have been riding for a few year, instead of just the new riders coming through the program. I think it's going to make for a better learning experience and more information retained when its a difference between "I HAVE to be here" and "I WANT to be here". 

[claffix]

they found them selves in a situation they didn't know how to handle. as a result something bad happened.

You're arguing against people saying the EXACT same thing over in the front/rear brake thread. I'm confused.

[cowboyrt]

You're arguing against people saying the EXACT same thing over in the front/rear brake thread. I'm confused.

Are you trying to start something ? cause i'm at a lost as to what your getting at....  In this thread I'm for manidory training. In that I'm saying how I ride.  Two different things.

This a great thread - keep it on track.

[Halfbakedbat]

I'd definitely take a course if it meant a break on my insurance rates.  I think the way to do this is to make the course optional with discounts for completing it.  That way you're gonna get training for the guys who have been riding for a few year, instead of just the new riders coming through the program. I think it's going to make for a better learning experience and more information retained when its a difference between "I HAVE to be here" and "I WANT to be here". 

+1

Forcing somebody to do something leaves a bad taste in your mouth.