Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

| Is that so bad?

Please, I wasn't making a value judgement, but one of consistency. We all know that laws are inconsistent and applied inconsistently, but I was surprised that I'd never considered that particular inconsistency in the seat belt debate. Now I'm curious, do you have to wear a seat belt on an ATV? If the desire is maximum safety, then why a lap belt and not a 4-point harness? Why not a motorcycle helmet!

| The legality of motorcycles is a separate issue.

Motorcycles aren't that cleanly separated: the relevant definitions of a "motor vehicle" cover cars, trucks, motorcycles, ATVs, farm vehicles, powered scooters, and, in some cases, Segways. Also see DUI laws and bicycles.

| Just because people are insane on motorcycles...

Although accidents are more brutal, it's not necessarily insane to ride a motorcycle considering their fuel economy. People do insane things in cars as well (eat, text, read, apply makeup).




Sort of OT: I processed accident claims for over five years. You don't have to do anything "insane" on a motorcycle to get seriously racked up. What would be a minor fenderbender in a car leading to minor whiplash, where the policyholder was trying to see how many neckrubs he could get covered, on a motorcycle can be them picking gravel out of your road rash and involve broken bones that don't want to mend right and require surgery weeks later. I also saw plenty of second degree burns on the leg from contact with the tailpipe. I never saw a single burn claim for just routine driving of a car.

As for ATVs, they should require more protection. I saw at least one claim involving loss of the foot and lower leg. It made even motorcycle accidents look relatively tame.

I probably reviewed over 60,000 accident files in my time with the company, to give some context for my impressions that motorcycles are just crazy dangerous, no matter how careful you are.


And the motorcyclists who do not get injured? You saw their insurance claims, too?

You have the most biased perspective on this as is possible :)


I am only remarking on comparable things, like a low speed, one vehicle car crash versus a low speed, one vehicle motor cycle crash. The outcomes are drastically different. Yes I also saw files on car crashes that left people mangled for life. Those folks usually were doing insane things, like drinking or doing drugs and driving 100mph at night. You can just be in the wrong place at the wrong time on a motorcycle and get your shit very permanently, very fucked up because of some other careless driver who did not see you. The same outcome in a car takes a lot more going wrong.

Edit: In reviewing that many files, most serious accidents had an element of "accident waiting to happen". Cases of "Damn, it sucks to be you. Shit happens." were very extremely in the minority. It radically changed my view of risk assessment.


That's not fair; she could easily look at the number of policyholders versus claims broken down by vehicle type. I'm sure the numbers looks as bad as she describes.


Note: Mz is a "she".


Thanks, fixed.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: