Motorcycle GDL & Mandatory Training

[Josh]

Don't we have a program in Saskatchewan where people who didn't attend school can challenge a test to get their GED?
Basically giving them the qualification of a highschool grad without having to attend the training?

I really don't think the idea of a system that allows for people to choose between demonstrating their skills through rigorous testing or taking a course that specifically prepares them to pass the same testing is really that hard of a concept.

Stop talking about challenging the test. What I asked was whether you were for or against the inclusion of mandatory training in the GDL program. I never said that if they chose to include mandatory training, that they couldn't/wouldn't include an option to challenge having to take it.

Would it make a difference in your opinion if I told you that they were going include that option? hmm? (I'm not actually saying they are... or aren't)

[Shawn]

I am for the mandatory training, but it would be nice that for a more experienced rider to be able to take a version of the course that didn't start with the push and glide portion of the current safety course.

[cowboyrt]

Sorry Josh, I'm guilty of getting of course on this thread as well.
Am I for it? YES
we can talk about details later.

[GMCdriver]

Stop talking about challenging the test. What I asked was whether you were for or against the inclusion of mandatory training in the GDL program. I never said that if they chose to include mandatory training, that they couldn't/wouldn't include an option to challenge having to take it.

Would it make a difference in your opinion if I told you that they were going include that option? hmm? (I'm not actually saying they are... or aren't)

Then I would agree because it wouldn't be mandatory anymore, there would be another option, a second avenue for people to take.
I know that one of the options on the table includes a process similar to what is done in Nova Scotia where training isn't mandatory but something like +80% of riders take a course anyways due to the difficulty of the testing and financial incentives on insurance costs, I like that.
I'm not against training, I just don't think mandating new riders is the best way to reach the most riders with that training, I like something that combines broad appeal with reasonable flexibility.
I'm sorry but I don't really know which of the two answers in your poll that would fall under, do you?

[orion]

As a motorcycle safety instructor myself - I'd rather teach folks who want to be there than people forced to be there - HOWEVER - I'd rather new riders take the course even if it's only by being forced to before they kill/mame/hurt themselves - or me - or someone else.

I rode for 5 or 6 years before I became an instructor - never took the course as a student (other than during instructor certification) - and I learnt AND unlearnt more than I thought possible.  I thought I had it together too, I only dropped a bike once in a parking lot my first season riding, never crashed or wiped out besides that - but looking back, I would advise everyone and anyone to TAKE THE COURSE.

People will spend over $4000 for a bike no sweat - but ask them to spend $400 on gear and another $400 on a safety course and all the sudden the excuses come out.

Stop talking about challenging the test.

To be fair Josh, this is something currently under serious consideration by SGI now that they've (recently) realized that processing the insane amount of folks in the province who would need to take the course is formidable.

[cowboyrt]

As a motorcycle safety instructor myself - I'd rather teach folks who want to be there than people forced to be there - HOWEVER - I'd rather new riders take the course even if it's only by being forced to before they kill/mame/hurt themselves - or me - or someone else.

I bet most people would end up having alot of fun once they got there.   

[orion]

I bet most people would end up having alot of fun once they got there.   

I think some would, but some wouldn't and that's what would make it frustrating. 

We - as instructors - don't make alot of coin to do it - we do it because we enjoy it.  Additionally - quite often we give up primo riding days to teach it - but after all is said and done - it's great fun to see people who are excited to be there and who do everything they can to improve.  You take away that excitement, enjoyment and willingness to try and it has great potential for it to become just another job - and I have 2 of those already (3 if you count the wife and 4 if you count the kids - haha)

[Josh]

To be fair Josh, this is something currently under serious consideration by SGI now that they've (recently) realized that processing the insane amount of folks in the province who would need to take the course is formidable.

I'm fully aware of what SGI is considering Kevin.

The reason I didn't make mention of such an option in the poll, is because I don't think I'd get people's true feelings. You can't say that you are PRO mandatory training ONLY IF there is an option NOT to take it. That's as good as saying that you are against the training.... because if there were no option, you'd be against it completely.

I'm sorry but I don't really know which of the two answers in your poll that would fall under, do you?

Probably neither. If you don't feel comfortable picking one of them, then don't vote.

[orion]

I'm fully aware of what SGI is considering Kevin.

The reason I didn't make mention of such an option in the poll, is because I don't think I'd get people's true feelings. You can't say that you are PRO mandatory training ONLY IF there is an option NOT to take it. That's as good as saying that you are against the training.... because if there were no option, you'd be against it completely.

I didn't say you were less than "fully aware" - corn flakes - **** - much? I didn't throw attitude at you my man.

And I respectfully disagree, the option to challenge the course will involve demonstrating skills that only a competent rider - who has many of the skills the course provides (whether they took it or not) - would be able to complete.  If they fail the challenge (one chance deal), then a'off to training they go.  End goal is achieved either way IMO and thus one CAN be for mandatory training and a challenge option at the same time.

[Sin Harvest]

    I vote yes, however it may take a number of years of growing pains before the riders who are “forced” to take the training no longer have a detrimental effect on the quality of training for those who would have taken the course anyways. There are pros and cons, but I think the inconvenience to some new riders is more then made up for in fewer funerals and hospital visits.

[Josh]

I didn't say you were less than "fully aware" - corn flakes - **** - much? I didn't throw attitude at you my man.

i'm sorry that you took that as attitude.

And I respectfully disagree, the option to challenge the course will involve demonstrating skills that only a competent rider - who has many of the skills the course provides (whether they took it or not) - would be able to complete.  If they fail the challenge (one chance deal), then a'off to training they go.  End goal is achieved either way IMO and thus one CAN be for mandatory training and a challenge option at the same time.

That's fine and good, but what you're arguing about isn't the question that I asked.

[GMCdriver]

Josh, I'm not trying to be a ****** bag(Seriously, no effort on my part at all, it just happens) the only reason I wanted to try discussing a more complete picture of the options involved is because I have concerns that SGI is going to missuse polls like this one and use them as a justification for running through any fool idea they come up with "because ninty-whatever % of sport bike riders polled support mandatory training."  I had a good talk with the owner of Thunder City the other day and he told me about a letter he received from SGI asking him to put into writing that he supports mandatory training but not wanting to give him much in the way of details to base his opinion.  I can't help but feel that SGI is trying to gather a bunch of vague "endorsements" that they can try to use to show support for whatever idea they decide to run with.

[orion]

I have the exact same concern as GMCDriver.

i'm sorry that you took that as attitude.

That's fine and good, but what you're arguing about isn't the question that I asked.

Fair enough

[Badvinny]

I taught the Sask. course for more than 10 years, I took it myself first although I had been racing motorcycles as a younster for 8 years before that. I saw early on that I had alot to learn about staying alive on the street and that my cocky nature wasnt going to do it.
 Later as an instructor I saw that most guys with my old cocky attitude didnt appreciatte the course and usually quit early on, and most women took it and got tons out of it.
 That being said, if you want to be a good motorcycle rider, get some training, and I do believe everybody new planning on riding on the street should. I convinced almost all of my riding buddies to take it back then and all of them would give it two thumbs up today! (Everyone of them still rides 'alive' today, 15 years later!)

[cowboyrt]

60 votes so far!   not bad - but I don't see why we can't easily double that