| Subject: |
|
On Fighting The Wrong Battles |
| Name: |
|
Bruce Arnold |
| Date Posted: |
|
Apr 22, 06 - 8:43 AM |
| Email: |
|
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com |
| Message: |
|
Hi Darrel,
Let me begin by saying how much I look forward to once again traversing I-90 across your great state in August on my way to Sturgis and some of the most beautiful scenery and enjoyable riding this side of Heaven...
I agree or empathize with much of what you say below, and like you I am a student of Sun Tzu. I do not believe in wasting limited resources fighting the wrong battles, and as I wrote in the November 2005 installment of Bruce on Bikers' Rights, "... We are fighting a battle that cannot be won, and doesn't need to be. We are engaging the enemy on their grounds, and under their terms. And if you follow the teachings of Sun Tzu, you know that to be a strategic blunder."
In that article, I was referring to making the fallacious argument that helmets are unsafe (the wrong battle) in the arena of Motorcycle Safety (enemy's terms). It turns out that same warning can be applied today in the context of mitigating INATTENTIONAL BLINDNESS (the right battle), the cause of fifty percent of ALL motorcycle accidents, and what I believe should be the primary if not exclusive focus of all MRO/SMRO campaigns in the arena of Motorcycle Awareness (our terms):
50% Of *ALL* Motorcycle Accidents Are Caused By Inattentional Blindness http://pub42.bravenet.com/forum/3562429698/fetch/679540/
Inattentional Blindness: It's About More than Just Conspicuity
http://pub42.bravenet.com/forum/3562429698/fetch/675410/2
Contrary to what the NHTSA Safety Nazis want us to believe, inattentional blindness is not just about conspicuity, and it cannot be mitigated simply by donning neon-colored clown suits and putting disco flicker lights all over our bikes. Conspicuity is only one of four factors contributing to inattentional blindness, and it's not even the one we should be focusing on. The research indicates that our focus should be EXPECTATION. Specifically, if we want to save bikers' lives by mitigating inattentional blindness, we must INCREASE THE EXPECTATION OF RISK, HARM OR LOSS ASSOCIATED WITH "NOT SEEING" A MOTORCYCLE AND CONSEQUENTLY MAIMING OR KILLING A BIKER.
So ... how do we do that?
There are many ways to address this issue, some of which were presented in the email that triggered this thread. More ideas have been posted in Hawk's SolRiders.com mailing list, and at Bruce's Bikers' Bulletin Board:
http://pub42.bravenet.com/forum/3562429698
As we learned from the failure of Florida's Stiffer Penalties Law, one approach that is NOT likely to significantly increase this expectation is non-specific ROW violation penalties. In the context of mitigating inattentional blindness, that is fighting THE WRONG BATTLE. Here is why:
Specific and Severe Penalties Offer A Cure For Inattentional Blindness http://pub42.bravenet.com/forum/3562429698/fetch/678120/
In other words, by forming ROW coalitions with bicyclists, pedestrians, crossing guards, mothers with strollers and crippled nuns, we may morally be doing the greater good and guaranteeing ourselves a place in Heaven ... but we aren't necessarily doing anything to keep a biker from getting There sooner than he or she planned.
Almost by definition, the mission of every MRO is to protect the rights and promote the interests of BIKERS. Not everybody outside of a cage ... BIKERS. The most precious of those rights is the right to life, and the biggest threat to bikers' lives is inattentional blindness. Consequently, it stands to reason that the primary focus of every MRO should be MITIGATING INATTENTIONAL BLINDNESS.
That will not be accomplished by fighting the wrong battles.
Ride Long, Ride Free!
Bruce
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
________________________________
From: Darrel Killion [mailto:killiond1@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Driving While Inattentive: The New DWI? (5)
All
I too am a multi-termed State Coordinator in the last year of my 3rd term having served one term in the 80’s and now approaching the end of my 2nd term in this century and I quite agree with Terry.
One of the biggest problems we as motorcyclists seem to have it this tendency to view ourselves as victims and worse yet, we often sound and even behave as victims. The fact is, we are not. We are hardworking, tax paying, voting, community oriented people for the most part and we certainly have all the rights anyone else has. Oh, sure there are those that will argue to the contrary but it is my contention, based on several years of interaction with our legislative and legal process, that this idea of being a victim group is more illusion then fact. If we are victims, then so are pedestrians, people that ride snow mobiles, atvs, lawn mowers, farm machinery and horses.
Every general that is worth a damn picks his battles and seeks the high ground. If he does not, then he fights the battle the opponent wants him to fight and almost always ends up with the low ground or worse yet, in a box canyon.
My point is that the issue of killing anyone on our roadways because of a Right of Way (ROW) violation is not just our problem. As Terry stated, when we narrow our focus to addressing this issue for bikers only, we facilitate opportunities and reasons to bring legislation against us because we are calling attention to ourselves, specifically. In effect, we end up trying to fight the battle on the ground our opponent has chosen and as such, the result will rarely be to our satisfaction. When we try to ram something down the public throat, we are viewed as a part of the problem, not part of the solution.
If we expand our horizons, form coalitions with the other groups the are also concerned about the lack of justice with regard to such things as ROW violations, develop legislation that works for all similarly concerned groups, we will gain ground in this effort, albeit the pieces we gain may be small, nevertheless, if they are positive they will be cumulative and to our benefit. After all, they did not build Rome in a day and we will not gain true and full justice for victims of ROW violations in a day either.
Yes, working within the system is hard work, and it does take a lot of time, however, here in SD, we have learned to work with the powers that be and in doing so, we have found that they are more than willing to work with us and without the constant threat of negative legislation because our cause is not just for bikers, but all users of the road, regardless of whether their mode of transportation is a multi-wheeled vehicle or leather personnel carriers.
Finally, in taking on a broader scope and working with the system, we cease being viewed as part of the problem and hence become part of the solution.
Darrel Killion
State Coordinator
ABATE of South Dakota
THoward618@aol.com wrote:
Hello all,
I'd like to address the issue Bruce has brought to attention. Yes, by all means, maiming or killing someone (biker) should have penalties at least as severe as DUI. In Colorado, we are helmet free. We have learned over the years that we cannot specifically address certain issues directly concerning motorcyclists with legislation. When we have done so, the dreaded h-bill comes into play. We have in legislation at this minute, addressed increasing penalties for Careless Driving in Colorado. Right now, most penalties, if you are convicted of careless driving, is 4 points off your license and a $65.00 fine. You want to kill a biker? Forget the gun, use your car!! We went in with this bill asking for mandatory license revocation. We too feel this is as important as DUI's. However, after the Senate judiciary committee hammered it out, they felt that was too stern. So it was amended to an "automatic suspension." This allows for the person to have a hearing for the possibility for a provisional license. We don't really like this, however, it is a step in the right direction. The fines have been increased as well, $500 to $1000. Is this perfect legislation? No. But it is a hell of a lot better than what we have had. This bill has moved thru the Senate and will be in the House next week. If this gets passed this session, next year we intend to work on right of way penalties, again addressing all vulnerable road users. I have never been one to "settle," however being in my second term as State Coordinator of ABATE of Colorado, I have learned, I have to play the game. No results come if we don't, and if we don't allow a little room to compromise, we will end up with a helmet law. So begs the question what are you going to do? Any of you involved in a SMRO know that you have a handful of people trudging along to keep our freedoms. What happens when this handful gets burned out? Are there others willing to step up? I have resolved myself to realizing there are certain people I can count on for action, the rest will remain passive and applaud us when we do something for them. It's worth it to me, after all, it is my freedoms I am fighting for. Just my 2 cents....
Terry Howard
ABATE of Colorado
State Coordinator |
|
Replies:
|
|
|
Comments by Freestyle Phil · Apr 22, 06 - 10:42 AM
|
|
|
Reply
Home
bravenet.com