Mountain Biking is Being presented as a Healthy Sport for Kids!
Mike Vandeman
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
Kayak44
> http://diy.despair.com/output/poster4291481.jpg
He's so jealous of the fun others have he has to belittle and mock
them. No wonder his first wife left him.
Opus
You do know that is a parody of a motivational poster, right?
Tom Sherman °_°
Mikey V. is a parody of a real environmentalist.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.
Mike Vandeman
wrote:
Of course, but the broken collarbone is real.
Opus
>
> >You do know that is a parody of a motivational poster, right?
>
> Of course, but the broken collarbone is real.
>
But there's nothing to say where that broken collarbone came from. My
elder daughter (the one getting married this weekend) broke her
collarbone on a swing set at her elementary school when she was in 5th
grade. Should we then remove all swing sets from all schools because
one had a structural failure and caused my daughter a painful injury?
No, that would be stupid. The leading cause of death for humans under
21 is motor vehicle wrecks, should we ban motor vehicles because of
that? No, there are many more reasons to ban motor vehicles than just
killing people under the age of 21, but we still have them.
Bicycles are good exercise, and MTB gets people away from the primary
cause of death when riding, the motor vehicle. Quit trying to get them
banned and instead work on something much worse, motor vehicles. Motor
vehicles are like a war zone in the middle of the transportation grid,
and more people are killed by them than are killed in all the armed
conflicts world-wide every year. The US has been averaging 41,000
deaths by motor vehicle wrecks alone every year since 1999. In 2007
(latest year for which statistics are available) just shy of 700
people were killed riding bicycles, and of that number less than a
dozen were wrecks without the involvement of at least one motor
vehicle. Very few bicycle on bicycle or single vehicle bicycle wrecks
are fatal.
I'll give you another number, bullet wounds average less than a 10%
fatality rate. Depending on speed motor vehicles kill at a rate of 20%
at 20 MPH to 99.999% at 60 MPH. In plain terms, cars are more fatal
than guns, even when someone is trying to kill someone else with the
gun. Even when someone gets hit by a gun shot, unless the bullet is
precisely placed it has a very low likelihood of causing death or even
permanent injury, but getting hit by a car at 30 MPH has a 85% chance
of death, a 10% chance of permanent injury, or 5% of recovery from
injury without permanent effects. The truck that hit me was doing
about 65 MPH...
Beej Jorgensen
>instead work on something much worse, motor vehicles.
He's been working on that for ages!
-Beej
runcyclexcski
> at 20 MPH to 99.999% at 60 MPH.
Source? I know at least 4 people who got into an accident at ~60 mph
and all walked away w/o a scratch. at 99.999 probability the chance of
me seeing this even would be 0.0001 power 4 which is very unlikely.
Mike Vandeman
wrote:
>On Jul 1, 2:54 am, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> >You do know that is a parody of a motivational poster, right?
>>
>> Of course, but the broken collarbone is real.
>>
>But there's nothing to say where that broken collarbone came from.
It came from a mountain biking accident, obviously.
My
>elder daughter (the one getting married this weekend) broke her
>collarbone on a swing set at her elementary school when she was in 5th
>grade. Should we then remove all swing sets from all schools because
>one had a structural failure and caused my daughter a painful injury?
Yes, ban the faulty ones, of course.
>No, that would be stupid. The leading cause of death for humans under
>21 is motor vehicle wrecks, should we ban motor vehicles because of
>that?
Yes, of course.
No, there are many more reasons to ban motor vehicles than just
>killing people under the age of 21, but we still have them.
>
>Bicycles are good exercise, and MTB gets people away from the primary
>cause of death when riding, the motor vehicle.
Walking can do that, without the risks that go with mountain biking.
Quit trying to get them
>banned and instead work on something much worse, motor vehicles.
Plenty of people are workng on that. There is absolutely no good
reason to allow bikes in natural areas. They just don't belong there.
Motor
>vehicles are like a war zone in the middle of the transportation grid,
>and more people are killed by them than are killed in all the armed
>conflicts world-wide every year. The US has been averaging 41,000
>deaths by motor vehicle wrecks alone every year since 1999. In 2007
>(latest year for which statistics are available) just shy of 700
>people were killed riding bicycles, and of that number less than a
>dozen were wrecks without the involvement of at least one motor
>vehicle. Very few bicycle on bicycle or single vehicle bicycle wrecks
>are fatal.
MANY mountain biking accidents are fatal! See
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/mtb160.
>I'll give you another number, bullet wounds average less than a 10%
>fatality rate. Depending on speed motor vehicles kill at a rate of 20%
>at 20 MPH to 99.999% at 60 MPH. In plain terms, cars are more fatal
>than guns, even when someone is trying to kill someone else with the
>gun. Even when someone gets hit by a gun shot, unless the bullet is
>precisely placed it has a very low likelihood of causing death or even
>permanent injury, but getting hit by a car at 30 MPH has a 85% chance
>of death, a 10% chance of permanent injury, or 5% of recovery from
>injury without permanent effects. The truck that hit me was doing
>about 65 MPH...
So what? That doesn't make mountain biking safe! Your logic is
specious.
Opus
NHTSA wrecks against pedestrians and pedacyclists, injuries and
fatalities broken down by speed at impact. It was available as a PDF
but the URL doesn't work any more. The fatality rate at lower speeds
has a lot of noise because of the variability of the wrecks and the
victims, but above 20 MPH the noise goes away. I don't know anyone
that can "walk away" from being hit with a car or truck at 60 MPH
without a car surrounding them. I was lucky to get away with all my
limbs still attached and only minor brain damage.
I was comparing apples to apples in fatality rates compared to
bullets. Not many people are shot while inside another bullet. A few
are shot in cars, but not enough to draw a statistical conclusion
about the event. Lots of people are hit by cars while riding bikes or
walking. So I wasn't comparing where the car hit another car with a
person inside of it but where the car actually hit the person
directly, well actually somebody else in the government did it for me.
One of the things I found fascinating was the breakdown of fatality by
caliber and style of bullet, the most fatal round was the .22 Long
Rifle hollow point, followed distantly by the .44 Magnum. Apparently
the .22 allowed precise placement of the bullet to do the most damage,
and the .44 left such a big hole that blood loss was the major fatal
mode. Motor vehicles major fatal mode was massive blunt force trauma
to the torso, followed by head injury.
Mike Vandeman
wrote:
>On Jul 1, 2:54 am, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> >You do know that is a parody of a motivational poster, right?
>>
>> Of course, but the broken collarbone is real.
>>
>But there's nothing to say where that broken collarbone came from. My
>elder daughter (the one getting married this weekend) broke her
>collarbone on a swing set at her elementary school when she was in 5th
>grade. Should we then remove all swing sets from all schools because
>one had a structural failure and caused my daughter a painful injury?
>No, that would be stupid. The leading cause of death for humans under
>21 is motor vehicle wrecks, should we ban motor vehicles because of
>that? No, there are many more reasons to ban motor vehicles than just
>killing people under the age of 21, but we still have them.
What are YOU doing about that problem? I spent 8 years on it. Mountain
bikers complain about motor vehicles, but instead of working on
getting rid of them, they join in & use one to carry their bikes to
the trailhead. What hypocrisy!
Opus
>snip<
> What are YOU doing about that problem? I spent 8 years on it. Mountain
> bikers complain about motor vehicles, but instead of working on
> getting rid of them, they join in & use one to carry their bikes to
> the trailhead. What hypocrisy!
> --
I'm not an off-road biker, but if you had read my blog (Witch on a
Bicycle) you would know what I do about the problem, I speak to police
departments, I lobby my representatives, and I ride nearly every day
obeying the laws and presenting a positive role model.
Mike Vandeman
wrote:
>On Jul 3, 9:24 pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@pacbell.net> wrote:
You don't seem to be responding to my question: how are you "working
on getting rid of them"? Hint: that requires reducing places to drive
& places to park. If you don't do that, cars will never cease to be a
problem. And defending mountain biking only shows that you don't have
a clue about what is important in this life, which is protecting the
other creatures, upon which humans are 100% dependent.
Kayak44
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 09:11:55 -0700 (PDT), Opus <opusthep...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 3, 9:24 pm, Mike Vandeman <mjva...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >>snip<
> >> What are YOU doing about that problem? I spent 8 years on it. Mountain
> >> bikers complain about motor vehicles, but instead of working on
> >> getting rid of them, they join in & use one to carry their bikes to
> >> the trailhead. What hypocrisy!
> >> --
>
> >I'm not an off-road biker, but if you had read my blog (Witch on a
> >Bicycle) you would know what I do about the problem, I speak to police
> >departments, I lobby my representatives, and I ride nearly every day
> >obeying the laws and presenting a positive role model.
>
> You don't seem to be responding to my question: how are you "working
> on getting rid of them"? Hint: that requires reducing places to drive
> & places to park. If you don't do that, cars will never cease to be a
> problem. And defending mountain biking only shows that you don't have
> a clue about what is important in this life, which is protecting the
> other creatures, upon which humans are 100% dependent.
They are doing more than you ever have done. ALL you do is "talk"
about spending 8 years, blah, blah. You were as effective with that
about as much as you have been successful with marriages.
Please don't mention "protecting other creatures." Your international
airline travel has caused more damage to the environment than any car
owner will ever do in their lifetime. Michael J. Vandeman, selfish
hypocrite.