Motorcycles patrolling US129

Loading thread data ...

Quoting some from the article:

]The county had its first motorcycle fatality of the year near the famous ride ]in May.

Notice "near".

]Since 2002, nine people have died in car and motorcycle crashes on the ]North Carolina side of the road, according to the Highway Patrol. Not all ]of the deaths were causes by speed or involve thrill riders. Tens of ]thousands of people ride the Dragon every year.

The article fairly notes both of these. Good work.

]Western North Carolina has long been a must-drive destination but it also ]ranks as one of the most deadly areas in the state for bikers when crashes ]are adjusted for population.

Not so good work. The population is small. It is a vacation destination, and many drivers who may have accidents, thrill riders or not, are probably from out of the area. To see the error in logic, assume that a single traffic fender bender occurs in a piece of deserted Arizona desert for the first time in 100 years. Since the number of accidents in this piece of desert per 100,000 population is now infinity, does that necessarily mean there is a big problem?

]Riders say they are glad to see the motorcycle cops.

This seems grossly misleading. One anecdotal Harley driver does not make "riders". Maybe "Some riders", or "At least one rider", but not "Riders."

Not that I say that the NC cops are unjustified to try to slow down things a bit. But actually, I am surprised how few serious accidents actually seem to occur there, given how fast I have seen some people drive. I do remember being swept past by motorcycles that raised the question "How come they lived long enough to learn to drive that fast?"

Leon

Reply to
Leon van Dommelen

Leon is exactly correct on each point. The best thing the cops can do is just be visible which has a bit of a calming effect. If they try to 'chase people down' they'll end up increasing the death toll which is POINTLESS! Let's hope common sense prevails but you know how that goes.

Chris

99BBB

Reply to
Chris D'Agnolo

"Chris D'Agnolo" wrote in news:980f7$44940763$471ea526$ snipped-for-privacy@ALLTEL.NET:

OK, who are you and why are you using Chris' name? ;-)

Yes, and that's the reason cameras aren't very effective, too many people beat them and know they can but people WILL slow down for a patrol car.

But if they don't chase people down the speeder may very well continue until he/she/it causes a crash. It's a lose/lose situation and the best way to handle the situation is for the police to follow SLOWLY behind and get a helicopter up over the speeder. Unfortunately that isn't always possible for a bunch of reasons.

Reply to
XS11E

Here in the UK they've started using a system of "average" speed cameras which is probably the best way of doing things if you want to slow people down. When you enter the "averaging" area your license plate is snapped, and then again when you leave the area, usually somewhere between 2 and 5 miles later. Your average speed is then calculated and if it's over the allowed speed limit, you get fined. This means that there's no point in going above the speed limit since you'll only need to slow down later on in order to lower your average speed again. As I say, this is the most effective speed-control method I can think of.

Eric

Reply to
Eric Baber

"Eric Baber" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net:

I'd like to see statistics as to who gets fined in relation to who gets snapped. Here it's running less than 13% which is why the cameras are totally ineffective in reducing speeding. Many times the picture doesn't clearly identify the driver so no citation is issued, if a citation is issued a very large percent beat the case in court so the

13% that do get fined learn not to speed and the 87% who don't get fined continue speeding.

It really has little to do with traffic control, it seems to be a huge gravy train for the folks who sell, install and maintain the cameras.

Reply to
XS11E

The Tail of the Dragon has an amazingly low crash rate vs the challenges that exist there and the number of people who go there specifically to 'challenge' the road. It's the human desire for self preservation that does it. Push your luck too far there and it might be your last 'push'. I still feel that occasional police presence on the road helps to remind everyone that it is a public road and that's probably the most effective thing they can do to limit fatalities w/o completely screwing up the whole wonderful situation. I still believe that if you take all the risks (fun?) out of life you're very likely to live longer. You're just not as likely to actually enjoy it!

Chris

99BBB

Reply to
Chris D'Agnolo

I don't have any statistics, but the whole notion of taking a speeding ticket to court doesn't apply in the UK (at least not to my knowledge). On this and other (motorcycle) newsgroups I've gathered the impression that, as you say, it's a bit of a game in the US in which you can more often than not talk your way out of a ticket. Not here in the UK; you get snapped, you get fined, you pay. I suppose there might be a few instances where you could argue your way out of a ticket in court - your wife giving birth in the backseat, that sort of thing - but the notion for example of "keeping up with the traffic, and going any slower would be dangerous" wouldn't wash here, as far as I'm aware.

That's becoming a greater concern here too but at the moment cameras a) may only be installed in spots that are known to be danger spots, and b) have to be clearly visible - they're painted bright, reflective yellow and you can't miss them (well, I have once, but that's because I was going so fast :-)) Fortunately that time the film in the camera was apparently empty since I never got a ticket. That's changing too, though, what with everything going high-tech - instead of film, the newer cameras now take the photos digitally and relay them to the head office straight away, electronically. One less chance of getting away with it...

Eric

Reply to
Eric Baber

I'd argue that if you don't smoke or drink you won't actually live longer, it'll just feel that way, right? :-)

Eric

Reply to
Eric Baber

"BK" wrote in news:EFVlg.22$ snipped-for-privacy@fe07.lga:

I think the Pennsylvania Turnpike did this, maybe they still do?

Reply to
XS11E

Awesome, time for a breather, a smoke, or a beer. (depending on your preference, and local ordinances.)

A little rest after a long ride; sounds like a "pit stop" to me.

Reply to
Remove This

35 years ago, the rumor was that the PT tolltaker would record your license plate number, and you'd get a ticket in the mail. But I can't verify that--I usually pulled into a rest area for a nap to burn off the excess time. I didn't speed to save time, I sped because the twisty parts were fun in my 240Z.
Reply to
Lanny Chambers

Eric, I'd argue that here EVERYTHING is about the money, it really is sad sometimes. Car and Driver magazine has done many good articles on the use of cameras in the U.S. and how the mfr gets them ok'd with the promise of big returns (and big safety of course) and how they can be paid for with the increased revenue. They were documenting examples where the cities, after the disappointing returns, (which would equate to more money from the city as there are 'quota' levels) would actually shorten the yellow lights to bump up the # of offenders. This worked but also bumped up the # of accidents at the same intersections (oh well). I know we're talking more about open road situations but the bottom line unfortunately will be the same, they'll use safety as the excuse to the people, they'll use revenue as the bait to the officials and on they'll go more concerned about the $ than the safety. It's an ugly track record but one that my own (Houston) is now heading down.

Chris

99BBB
Reply to
Chris D'Agnolo

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.