To The General
From: "Mike Dench" <dench@shore.intercom.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998

   Dear Sir, through the magic of email I received a copy of a statement about motorcycling attributed to your good self.  I am replying to it based on the assumption that it did, in fact, originate from yourself.  I hope you will do me the kindness of reading my counter arguments to your missive - if indeed it was from you. I shall quote the relevant parts of the message and then reply to them.

1.  AS I REACH THE DOORSTEP OF RETIREMENT, I TAKE TIME TO REFLECT ON THE PRECIOUS GIFT OF LIFE.  MERE WORDS CANNOT EXPRESS MY FEELINGS CONCERNING THE FATALITIES WE'VE EXPERIENCED AS A RESULT OF MOTORCYCLE MISHAPS.  JUST THIS FISCAL YEAR, THE AIR FORCE HAS LOST 11 INDIVIDUALS.  WHILE THESE NUMBERS MAY SEEM SMALL COMPARED TO PREVIOUS YEARS, THEY REPRESENT HUMAN BEINGS, LOST FOREVER TO THEIR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS.

     Just out of curiousity, how many fatalities were experienced as a result of foolhardy flying in the last fiscal year? What about casualties through car driving? Why select motorcycles in particular.
   After all the occupation of being in the Armed Forces is hardly without risk, is it?  One would expect a commander to show due concern for operational safety - given the nature of the job - but on the other hand wouldn't one also expect young men and women attracted to the service to be attracted to exciting sports?

2.  THREE AMC AIRMEN ARE DEAD BECAUSE THEY RODE MOTORCYCLES FOR THE APPARENT BENEFITS OF FREEDOM, ECONOMY, AND PERSONAL CHOICE!  A1C SHAWN (name deleted) LOST CONTROL AT HIGH SPEED, WENT INTO A DITCH, AND STRUCK A POWER POLE.  SSGT BRANCHE (name deleted) WAS DRIVING A BORROWED MOTORCYCLE WELL ABOVE THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT, STRUCK A CURB, AND WAS EJECTED MSGT DONALD (name deleted)'S MOTORCYCLE WAS HIT BY A CAR MERGING INTO HIS LANE, CAUSING HIM TO IMPACT ANOTHER VEHICLE.

     Strange, I thought the Armed Forces were considered a bastion of the American way of life which surely includes the right to personal freedom, which includes taking risks if that be ones choice. Of the three examples you give above, only two were actually caused by operator error

3.  MOTORCYCLISTS OFTEN CRY "FOUL" WHEN THE FINGER OF BLAME IS POINTED AT THEM.  THEY POINT TO FOUR-WHEEL VEHICLE OPERATORS WHO SHOW LITTLE RESPECT BY SEEMINGLY IGNORING THEIR PRESENCE ON ROADWAYS. HOWEVER, 8 OF THE 11 USAF FATALITIES WERE SINGLE VEHICLE MISHAPS, MEANING THE CONDITIONS AND/OR MOTORCYCLIST WAS AT FAULT.
   
     You can't draw or imply statistical conclusions from such a small sample as this. It appears, on the face of it, that 2/3rds of the riders were killed through their own carelessness. However if that were the case then motorcycling would have been banned long ago as the resulting carnage would beggar description, that is, if one extrapolates from the above inference.
     I am very concerned by the use of the world 'fault' here, as it's a personal bugbear of mine that I always like to point out to new riders that there is no such thing as an  'accident' and that the words 'blame' and 'fault' have no place in identifying the cause and effect of damage and injury caused by injudicious operation of a motor vehicle. Even the best of us can make errors in judgement that can result in damage or injury whilst riding, not wearing the proper safety equipment, not making allowance for the unexpected, not planning for any eventuality. indeed I always tell my students that riding a motorcycle is akin to flying an early biplane with no parachute and its concomittant mechanical weaknesses, any failure can be fatal.  It's not anyones FAULT though, would the Wright Brothers have flown if they had that sort of mentality?

4.  RIDING MOTORCYCLES IS A HIGH RISK GAMBLE.  INSURANCE RATES SUPPORT THIS.  EVEN THOUGH MOTORCYCLISTS MAKE UP ONLY ABOUT 3% OF HIGHWAY VEHICLES, THEY ACCOUNT FOR MORE THAN 10% OF THE FATALITIES! HIGH-POWERED "SPORT" CYCLES ARE EVEN MORE DANGEROUS; WHO REALLY NEEDS A VEHICLE THAT WILL DO 150 MPH?

       No one needs a vehicle that will do 150 mph but plenty of people want one. No one needs hang gliders, mountain climbing equipment or - come to that - weapons of mass destruction either!  I am fairly sure that the concensus of opinion would be heavily in favor of my last remark.
     It's my choice and the choice of others like me, to indulge in the thrilling pastime of taking unnecessary risks. one can, of course, argue that 150mph is better exercised on the racetrack but frankly sir most people who buy powerful sportbikes do so more because they like to own something that has that capability rather than to actually use it.  It has a cachet of its own and even given that single track vehicles are inherently unstable, modern motorcycles are surprisingly competent within those limitations. I have ridden in excess of 130 mph and had occasion to discover, to my delight, that modern brakes are capable of hauling the vehicle back down to zero with surprising speed and stability.
     I agree that its idiotic to allow a novice rider to purchase and ride a 150mph capable machine on the public roads with no need for any kind of special training but that right is presumably protected by the same Constitution that you are sworn to uphold and which, incidentally, also allows mentally unstable people to surround themselves with high powered weaponry.

5.  I CHARGE EACH AMC COMMANDER AND SUPERVISOR TO IDENTIFY THEIR PERSONNEL WHO RIDE MOTORCYCLES, THEN SIT DOWN WITH THEM TO ENSURE THEY UNDERSTAND THE ASSOCIATED HIGH RISKS.  ASK THEM THE FOLLOWING
     QUESTIONS FROM ME:
     - "HAVE YOU APPLIED OPERATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT TO ONE OF THE DEADLIEST THREATS YOU FACE?"
     - "CAN YOU OBTAIN ALTERNATIVE, SAFER TRANSPORTATION, ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT OR DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER?"
     - "HAVE YOU COMPLETED A COMPREHENSIVE MOTORCYCLE SAFETY RIDER CLASS?"
     - "DO YOU OWN AND USE PROPER PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT?"
     - "DO YOU REALIZE THAT YOU'RE EVEN MORE VULNERABLE WHEN YOU'RE INTOXICATED, TIRED, STRESSED, OR OVER THE SPEED LIMIT?"

     I suppose this was meant in a kindly way, at least I hope it was but it wouldn't sit well with me to have my superiors interfering in my personal life. Its against the law to drive when one is unfit to do so, what else needs to be said? I seriously doubt if any but the most rabid riders would ride out of choice during unsuitable conditions. The rider safety course and proper protective equipment should be a mandatory inclusion with the sale of a new motorcycle in my opinion. This is not a statement that many other riders or dealers will agree with!

6.  THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT RIDING MOTORCYCLES POSES A SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER RISK TO INDIVIDUAL SURVIVAL THAN DRIVING AN AUTOMOBILE. WE DISCOURAGE THE USE OF TOBACCO, BECAUSE OF THE DOCUMENTED RISK. LET'S NOW DO THE SAME FOR MOTORCYCLES IN THIS SPECIAL WAY.  AT LEAST IF OUR PEOPLE RIDE THEM WE WILL HAVE INSURED THEY DO IT RESPONSIBLY.

     I really don't think that your position gives you the right to adopt this particular platform nor to 'charge' your personnel to act upon a directive that is entirely upon your own initiative. It is quite frankly a pompous statement made by one who obviously has little understanding or sympathy for the sport of motorcycling.  I personally detest ballgames but that doesn't give me the right to suggest those under my care look elsewhere for their entertainment.  Do you have any idea how many people are injured playing various ballgames?  Dislocated joints, torn muscles and ligaments, its disgraceful. Absolutely dwarfs motorcycling as far as injuries go.

7.  FOR YOUR PERSONNEL WHO CONTINUE TO ACCEPT THIS UNNECESSARY RISK, YOU MUST URGE THEM TO THINK OF OTHERS- -EACH TIME THEY CLIMB ON A MOTORCYCLE.  THEY SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES WHAT SORROW, LOSS, AND EXTRA WORK THEIR PREMATURE DEATH MIGHT HAVE ON THEIR FAMILY, FRIENDS, AND CO -WORKERS.  LET'S SAVE SOME LIVES WITH OUR INTEREST . GENERAL WALTER KROSS, COMMANDER.

     Absolutely and what about, those under your command? Do you know what they're up to, flying around in machines that are grossly overpowered, carrying various munitions and other explosive materials. Do they have the proper equipment and training?  Not if they strafe ski-lifts I would suggest and the list goes on and on.  Probably some of their family, friends and loved ones (not to mention those of the ski-lift victims and all the others injured as a result of military cock-ups) might be greatly relieved if they stopped doing such reckless things too.

     By the way, just to add some perspective to my comments, I am married with three children, aged 51 and an educator who has been riding motorcycles for daily commuting and pleasure for the last 35 years.  I wouldn't dream of telling my students what they should or should not do for their personal enjoyment and I suggest you would do well to refrain from interfering in the personal lives of your enlisted personnnel. It smacks of both Communism and National Socialism to my way of thinking, it carries echoes of Big Brother and its damn well unconstitutional.


Mike Dench