Motorcyclist Dies after running into driveway chain

[badmotogoozer]

The Steve McQueen great escape wire across a track/path even if private property would be dealt with criminally due to the intent to injure.

 

 

In the case of my story, the person was not charged as a farmer has the right to put up barbed wire anywhere on his farm property. All he needs do is state that the wire went up for the purpose of keeping cows off the river. I have no idea if there were any cows on that pasture at the time but again, only needs to state that he was going to bring them there. No charges were ever brought - they would never stick..

 

I grew up in a small (2500) farm community in Manitoba. It is home to the Canadian Power Tobaggan Championships (F1). This story filled the local paper for months. It would be hard to find someone who doesn't have a sled there, and harder still to find someone who'd never run the river.

 

The only repercussion was having to carry the knowledge that he ended the life of his neighbor's 16 year old kid.

 

As MC riders (applies to sleds too) we have to avoid assuming that everything today is the same as it was yesterday. A new pothole in the middle of your favorite corner could have the same result if you're riding hard.

 

Rj

[dlaing]

 

The only repercussion was having to carry the knowledge that he ended the life of his neighbor's 16 year old kid.

 

Quit your bleeding heart crap and feel the hate.

The righteous would have hit the brakes in time, slipped under the barbed wire, pulled the wire snips out, thought for a second about snipping the wire, and then said, nah and gassed out of there with prayers in their head that Darwinism would weed out the next rider with less than 20/20 vision.

Some will dodge a large rock that makes their heart skip a beat mid turn and continue down the road, while others turn back and remove that rock.

Your life may have been saved by someone you never met, and someone who is a better person than you or maybe just a bleeding heart fool...Perhaps there are real angels here on Earth or maybe the rocks just move themselves out of the way

[Skeeve]

Seems to me that all these snowmobilers could've learned a trick or two from the "greatest generation"[1]; haven't they ever seen pix of the jeeps in WWII w/ the upright angle-iron pillar welded on the front bumper that comes up over head height for the jumpseat passenger? They jury-rigged those things 'cause when they were storming across Normandy, the Jerrys had left piano-wire strung across the roads [the windshields were normally left folded flat, unless really cold or driving in the wet; they wouldn't have prevented decapitation anyway, as the wire would have ridden up the flat windshield & then *poinked* back down in time to do harm anyway...]

 

Seems to me that a little preventative medicine would have gone a long way for the high-speed trespass snowmobile crowd...

 

[1] Who had no wish to earn such a moniker; overall they'd much rather have stayed home & given it all a miss, but they didn't.

[Guest ratchethack]

Seems to me that a little preventative medicine would have gone a long way for the high-speed trespass snowmobile crowd...

Skeeve, no offense meant to our many exemplary Nanooks o' the North , but by my distinct memory of many long winters in snow country (22 in Michigan followed by 5 winters in the High Sierra), -- and strangely enough, much as it seems to be with many motorcyclists, it occurs to me -- more'n a few o' "the sledders" tend to be a couple o' ice cubes short o' a full highball glass -- if'n you get my snow-drift . . .

 

They've got these insane cross-country races that go f'er hundreds of miles. I remember one year the guy who won one of 'em was pretty grouchy when he crossed the finish line, as well as being considerably bloody. It was back when they still raced with open-face helmets. Seems he'd fallen off in a high-speed whooper. No big deal, but by this point in the race his beard had frozen solid (as usual). What was a little out o' the ordinary about this crash was that this time his iced-up and frozen-solid beard BROKE OFF when he fell, taking with it a considerable chunk of his face. . . . the guy raced on for I forgot how many dozens of miles that way. I dunno if he found the missing piece and put it in his sled or not. Since it was frozen, maybe they could've thawed it out & sewed it back on?

[raz]

i'm guesing this system exists in other countries and was hoping to hear of others views. ciao

In Sweden it's quickly developing all over the country. Our 'national motorcycle union', whatever you'd called that in english, is working against this but personally I don't get why they do. The wires will either stop meeting cars from hitting me or stop me (and cut me to pieces) from hitting them. In my head, the risk of meeting cars is way way way bigger than me falling asleep and going into the wires. I don't do 300 km/h, or even 200 (well not regularly). If I did, it wouldn't be on a public highway and certainly not a wired one. So I like them.

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

Helicopters are not immune to wires either. There are many helicopters equipped with wire strike protection but every year I hear of more than one accident invloving wire strikes.

 

[belfastguzzi]

haven't they ever seen pix of the jeeps in WWII w/ the upright angle-iron pillar welded on the front bumper that comes up over head height for the jumpseat passenger? They jury-rigged those things 'cause when they were storming across Normandy,

History? They've been a fitment on various police and army vehicles here for many a long year.

[mike wilson]

The day it becomes someone else's responsibility for every idiot who falls into an open manhole is the day that the tyranny of the cradle-to-grave Nanny State has arrived, my friends.

 

Here's an interesting one for you:

 

About half a mile from my house is a big roundabout. It is about 150yards on a side, two lanes, at an intersection between two dual carriageways. One of them crosses over the other, so there are two underpasses. Think of it as more of a rectangle with very rounded corners than as a circle. The line of sight is poor, as the middle is taken up with an earth bank carrying the higher carriageway. Apart from that, it is easy to drive around it at near the legal limit (60 mph) for these roads and the large areas of clear cut land surrounding it allow you plenty of room to come to a stop in case of miscalculation.

 

When it rains, the drains cannot cope on two of the diagonally opposite corners. If one exits the roundabout from the exit after one of these corners, you are in the middle of a direction change as you cross the water and mud running across the road. About 50 yards further on is a direction sign held up by, now, three 9" metal poles. Having lived here for seven years, I have noted that the sign never stays up more than about three months and is always demolished after heavy rain. Not difficult to work out why. Because of the geometry, any car that loses adhesion by hitting the runnoff spins and perfectly collects the sign on the driver's door. The third time it happened, it was the son of someone I know and he was severely injured.

 

At this point, I realised that moving the sign to a different location would prevent further injuries, at least, and pointed this out to the local highway authority. The result of this was its reinstatement, in the original place, with thicker poles. It was comprehensively demolished last night.

 

So: yuo are driving along a major highway when you encounter circumstances more akin to a farm track, you lose control and crash. You are severely injured. Who is responsible for what?

 

In case anyone is interested, this should be a link to an aerial photo. I am talking about the exit to the left of the big roundabout in the bottom right and the runnoff goes across the road approximately where the red car is.

 

http://www.multimap.com/map/photo.cgi?clie...;multimap.y=241

[Bill Hagan]

 

****

 

At this point, I realised that moving the sign to a different location would prevent further injuries, at least, and pointed this out to the local highway authority. The result of this was its reinstatement, in the original place, with thicker poles. It was comprehensively demolished last night.

 

****

 

 

I would think that, especially on some "slow news' night, your local TV news folks or newspaper might find that story worth reporting.

 

Bill

[Guest ratchethack]

So: yuo are driving along a major highway when you encounter circumstances more akin to a farm track, you lose control and crash. You are severely injured. Who is responsible for what?

Of all the rules and regulations I had to memorize when I took my Driver's training test at age 15, one of the most common-sense rules of the road that I never forgot (and which I recall appeared on the written test) was [something to the effect] that:

 

It is UNLAWFUL to travel at a rate of speed unsafe for the conditions at hand.

 

Now of course there are exceptions to every rule, and this one is no different. I've had many such exceptional circumstances with close-call results, as have we all. An incident in Mexico comes to mind, suddenly coming upon an unmarked mound of dirt as big as a car in the center of my lane from around a blind curve, which had been hidden from sight behind a cliff on a twisty coast road with no shoulder....

 

Mitigating circumstances will of course preclude the application of this kind of general law, as would be proper, judicious and appropriate in any court of law where justice is actually observed. It seems to be a solid common-sense law to me. But it's evidently not applied much here in this country anymore, as the insanity of irresponsible litigation/tort law and the juggernaut of corruption of the legal/insurance syndicate has a death-grip on much of our judicial system, and the application of common sense has become so UNCOMMON that entire generations of citizens seem to be incapable of recognizing common sense for identification purposes, even when it makes its increasingly frequent appearance on a slab at the morgue.....

 

If it's raining, or it has been raining and streets are wet, it would make COMMON SENSE for the application of the law to support the exercise of caution when entering an area known to be a hazard when wet -- and yes, IMHO the responsibility for safe driving STILL falls upon the driver, such hazards notwithstanding. If unfamiliar with the area, it would make COMMON SENSE for any driver to be cautious if it has obviously been raining IN CASE of standing or running water, accumulation of mud, etc.

 

Should such hazardous circumstances, presumably easily anticipated by any driver with enough sense to pass a driver's test -- in most, if not all cases easily seen well in advance when driving and alert at a safe speed -- EXCUSE the driver from exercising due caution?!

 

Let's not confuse the stupidity of a mindless bureaucracy that ignores the nature of a historic hazard by erecting a more substantial sign pole in the place of lesser poles that repeatedly get knocked out with the question at hand.

 

In reply to your question, Mike, which I find absolutely fascinating in itself, I'd say that -- again, generally speaking, unless there are overriding mitigating circumstances -- in a society where laws are designed to serve the common good and to protect citizens through the fair and equitable exercise thereof, the driver is without question at fault in the hypothetical situation you've posed above. Correct application of a fair and just law would support appropriate safe behavior on the road. When a driver with vision and reflexes physically sufficient to legally drive encounters circumstances akin to a farm track, he should be attentive enough and intelligent enough to DRIVE like he's on a farm track! -- and he alone should bear full responsibility! If he's capable, yet his behavior is neither attentive nor intelligent enough for safe driving, it should NOT fall upon society to pick up the tab for his negligence!

 

Is there anyone on this planet who would not agree 100% with this assessment, or has the rising damp of the mentality of the Nanny State infected and twisted the minds of more people than I'd imagined?! I'd just LOVE to hear an attempt at a defense of the indefensible on this one. . . .

 

Enquiring minds just gotta know, and eagerly await, rapt with fascination!

[dlaing]

 

Correct application of a fair and just law would support appropriate safe behavior on the road. When a driver with vision sufficient to legally drive encounters circumstances akin to a farm track, he should be attentive enough and intelligent enough to drive like he's on a farm track!

 

Is there anyone on this planet who would not agree 100% with this assessment, or has the rising damp of the mentality of the Nanny State infected and twisted the minds of more people than I'd imagined?! I'd just LOVE to hear an attempt at a defense of the indefensible on this one. . . . <_>

 

Enquiring minds just gotta know, and eagerly await, rapt with fascination!

Of course here I am to disagree with the assessment.

If the highway workers plant rows of cabbage in the number 3 lane on I5 without putting up a warning sign, the nanny state is failing in its obligations to nanny.

You may have 20/20 vision, but I believe the law only requires 20/40 vision in one eye, under ideal lighting situations. Add night, rain, 14 hours on the road, and cellphones, and one's ability to focus on the cabbage patch diminishes quickly.

One has a reasonable expectation that the ground won't suddenly and unexectedly open up on them. If not we would be paralyzed with fear driving down the interstate at 30MPH. Try taking out a 20 foot section of bridge on most high speed freeways and see how many lemmings plunge to their deaths.

I know I have hit constructions zones at night in the rain, that were difficult to navigate at 30mph, and if it were not for the warning signs that did not explain the dip that I nearly go airborn on, but suggested reducing speed from 55 to 20MPH, I would have crashed without a doubt if I had maintained by lemming like 55MPH.

Just blame my living on the nannies.

[Guest ratchethack]

Of course here I am to disagree with the assessment.

Now who would've expected such a thing?!

 

. . . . . (sigh) . . . . . But, uh, Dave. You evidently failed to notice that my question was directed to those on THIS planet (see above and below). Sorry, but occasional visitors would not seem to qualify very well to reply to my challenge above in the context of this discussion. To be entirely honest, I'm afraid y'er perennial other worldly attempts at defense of the indefensible have become too predictable to hold much interest, let alone fascination. . . But thanks for the post, anyway. At least it's good f'er a few yuks.

Is there anyone on this planet who would not agree . . .

Must I always be the one to remind you wot planet we're on here, Dave?

 

This is the BLUE planet, Dave.

 

Must interpret to comprehend. . . . . I do b'lieve this post calls for the Remulacian Vice-Versa Mind Meld! Are all 38 Remulacian digits well plugged into all 38 Remulacian bodily orifices? Good. Then we'll begin.

 

Now on the PURPLE planet, Dave, where you seem so fond of insisting on reminding us where y'er from, I recognize that among other things, the dreaded Garthoks threaten every Remulacian citizen, and what is right-side up on the Blue planet is upside-down there on the Purple planet, and vice-versa. The transition between blue and purple worlds seems to require passage through a reverso portal of sorts -- as seems to be consistent with differences we've previously explored in y'er unearthly, dark and purply Remulacian laws of physics, as well as those dark and purply Remulacian rules of logic that you seem so compelled to encumber y'erself with when y'er visiting us here on the blue planet.

If the highway workers plant rows of cabbage in the number 3 lane on I5 without putting up a warning sign, the nanny state is failing in its obligations to nanny.

Hmmmmmmm.......Alternate, incompatible worlds would indeed once again seem to be colliding here!

 

The effects of seven-dimension, reverse-polarity gravity wells, and the toxic, mind-crippling hallucinogenic distorting effects of atmospheric nitrous oxide on Remulac will of course reduce anything resembling Earth logic to absurdities. Under the influence of such effects, fevered hallucinations of the Remulacian Nanny State planting cabbages in the thoroughfares, along with Garthoks , of course, could no doubt be perceived as equally REAL, and anything resembling the realm of possibilities on Earth would of course be perceived as utter folly -- and vice-versa!

 

Though a breath of toxic Remulacian "fresh air" is always illustrative of just how absurd such perspectives as these can appear here on Earth (thank you very much as always, Dave), your response does make me wonder what "obligations to nanny" by the nanny state might exist on Remulac??

 

You see, here on the BLUE planet, Dave, at least in modern free societies, we don't seem to have any such "obligations to nanny" by the nanny state enumerated in our Constitutions at all, nor in any of our various laws of the various lands. Though historically, of course, since the dawn of man, there have always been no lack of politicians to consistently try to bring the Nanny State to a consistently ever-appreciative and ever-hopeful population of weak-minded dunderheads and The Great Unwashed. Some have even "succeeded" in a manner of speaking -- if such "successes" as the People's Paradises of Cooba, Venezuela, North Korea, the USSR, etc. to name a few examples, may be counted as Nanny State "successes" by anyone but their bloodthirsty, barbaric, insane, and tyrannical leaders. You see, it seems that the historical record has proven time after time without exception that all such Nanny State "successes" have been ultra-brief at best, exist only in the minds of the hapless lemmings who fall for it, and the Blue Planet reality has been nothing short of devastating disasters of abominations of massive proportion, death of countless millions, and destruction beyond human measure in the long run. . . . Look it up. It's in the original, un-revised history record.

Just blame my living on the nannies.

Err, if you insist -- by all means! Far be it from me not to give full credit where credit's due. . . . but here on the Blue planet, seems to me that livin' dumb and blind, led around like livestock with a ring in y'er nose by the Nanny State until you get whacked for questioning the inevitable horrific repression of that same Nanny State ain't much of a livin'. . . .

 

The dark, purply, and foreboding planet of Remulac from high orbit approach:

[Paul Minnaert]

what I can't get: he lived in the neighbourhood, then as a motorcyclist you spot these sort of circumstances. Even when you pass by car. I record these things in my head. But maybe not everyone's head does this.

[dlaing]

what I can't get: he lived in the neighbourhood, then as a motorcyclist you spot these sort of circumstances. Even when you pass by car. I record these things in my head. But maybe not everyone's head does this.

The chain is not always up.

It is taken down for lawn mowers and children to enter.

This guy may have been in the habit of walking his kid to and from school and never saw the chain up.

I rarely see it down because I leave for work after it goes back up and I am at work when it presumably comes down in the evening.

I too have zipped my motorcycle up that driveway when the chain was not hooked up.

From my recollection the chain was not hooked up more frequently in the past.

My neighbors' black lab ran into the chain once and learned his lesson.

This guy won't get a second chance.

[dlaing]

Now who would've expected such a thing?! :whistle

 

. . . . . (sigh) . . . . . But, uh, Dave. You evidently failed to notice that my question was directed to those on THIS planet (see above and below). Sorry, but occasional visitors would not seem to qualify very well to reply to my challenge above in the context of this discussion. To be entirely honest, I'm afraid y'er perennial other worldly attempts at defense of the indefensible have become too predictable to hold much interest, let alone fascination. . . But thanks for the post, anyway. At least it's good f'er a few yuks. :lol

 

Must I always be the one to remind you wot planet we're on here, Dave? :huh

 

This is the BLUE planet, Dave.

 

Must interpret to comprehend. . . . . I do b'lieve this post calls for the Remulacian Vice-Versa Mind Meld! Are all 38 Remulacian digits well plugged into all 38 Remulacian bodily orifices? Good. Then we'll begin.

 

Now on the PURPLE planet, Dave, where you seem so fond of insisting on reminding us where y'er from, I recognize that among other things, the dreaded Garthoks threaten every Remulacian citizen, and what is right-side up on the Blue planet is upside-down there on the Purple planet, and vice-versa. The transition between blue and purple worlds seems to require passage through a reverso portal of sorts -- as seems to be consistent with differences we've previously explored in y'er unearthly, dark and purply Remulacian laws of physics, as well as those dark and purply Remulacian rules of logic that you seem so compelled to encumber y'erself with when y'er visiting us here on the blue planet.

 

Hmmmmmmm.......Alternate, incompatible worlds would indeed once again seem to be colliding here!

 

The effects of seven-dimension, reverse-polarity gravity wells, and the toxic, mind-crippling hallucinogenic distorting effects of atmospheric nitrous oxide on Remulac will of course reduce anything resembling Earth logic to absurdities. Under the influence of such effects, fevered hallucinations of the Remulacian Nanny State planting cabbages in the thoroughfares, along with Garthoks , of course, could no doubt be perceived as equally REAL, and anything resembling the realm of possibilities on Earth would of course be perceived as utter folly -- and vice-versa!

 

Though a breath of toxic Remulacian "fresh air" is always illustrative of just how absurd such perspectives as these can appear here on Earth (thank you very much as always, Dave), your response does make me wonder what "obligations to nanny" by the nanny state might exist on Remulac?? :huh2

 

You see, here on the BLUE planet, Dave, at least in modern free societies, we don't seem to have any such "obligations to nanny" by the nanny state enumerated in our Constitutions at all, nor in any of our various laws of the various lands. Though historically, of course, since the dawn of man, there have always been no lack of politicians to consistently try to bring the Nanny State to a consistently ever-appreciative and ever-hopeful population of weak-minded dunderheads and The Great Unwashed. Some have even "succeeded" in a manner of speaking -- if such "successes" as the People's Paradises of Cooba, Venezuela, North Korea, the USSR, etc. to name a few examples, may be counted as Nanny State "successes" by anyone but their bloodthirsty, barbaric, insane, and tyrannical leaders. You see, it seems that the historical record has proven time after time without exception that all such Nanny State "successes" have been ultra-brief at best, exist only in the minds of the hapless lemmings who fall for it, and the Blue Planet reality has been nothing short of devastating disasters of abominations of massive proportion, death of countless millions, and destruction beyond human measure in the long run. . . . Look it up. It's in the original, un-revised history record.

 

Err, if you insist -- by all means! Far be it from me not to give full credit where credit's due. . . . but here on the Blue planet, seems to me that livin' dumb and blind, led around like livestock with a ring in y'er nose by the Nanny State until you get whacked for questioning the inevitable horrific repression of that same Nanny State ain't much of a livin'. . . . :huh2

 

The dark, purply, and foreboding planet of Remulac from high orbit approach:

Well said!

You are probably the only one here who believes 100% that there is no need for a warning sign when one encounters circumstances akin to a farm track on a road when going down the interstate or riding around a near blind turn. You apparently either fail to see how it would be disastrous, or you are so intent on your mission to destroy the nanny state, that you would sooner see the people crash and die than put up a warning sign.

You probably skulk around at night cutting down stop signs and digging trenches in the middle of the road to test people's resistance of the nanny state. Some call that type of activity psychopathic.

But surely you are not, and you don't really believe 100% that a warning sign is not needed when a major highway suddenly becomes akin to a farm track????

If you don't believe a warning sign is necessary, than you are clearly the one with feet not firmly planted on Earth.

I did make an error in that I interpreted farm track to mean a tract of farm land. Which would include plowed earth.

None the less, I have driven cars and motorcycles down farm track, which apparently means a dirt road, often with two treadways. I have also seen my friends get their cars towed out of such muddy roads by tractors. There is a reason many farmers buy trucks and tractors. Perhaps you believe cars without four wheel drive and 12 inch ground clearance should be outlawed?

Perhaps it is all part of a Libertarian dreamscape where the smooth roads are toll roads and all others are farm track, every man, woman, and child on their own for themselves.