Loud pipes and other Government BS

[oldbiker]

It's not a matter of loud pipes offending the majority, or seat belt and helmet laws. What it boils down to is everytime our law makers enact a new law "WE" lose another freedom. Soon we will become subjects, with only the freedoms the government will allow us to have. If you are for banning loud pipes that's your choice. Wait until they ban something you want and see how you feel.

What is it you want that they are about to ban?

[rewindgy]

B.J's!! My bad!!

[oldbiker]

I want the freedom of choice. "I" should be able to choose if "I" want the protection of a seat belt or a helmet. My wearing a seat belt or helmet harms noonr but me.I don't want some politician making decisions for me. Talking on a cell phone while you're driving could get someone else killed. In Georgia there's no law against it. Right now they want fast food joints to tell fat people they can't eat in thier businesses. A school system in Texas told an eight year old he couldn't go to school because of his haircut. There's just too much government intervention in our lives.

[misunderstood]

I want the freedom of choice. "I" should be able to choose if "I" want the protection of a seat belt or a helmet. My wearing a seat belt or helmet harms noonr but me.I don't want some politician making decisions for me. Talking on a cell phone while you're driving could get someone else killed. In Georgia there's no law against it. Right now they want fast food joints to tell fat people they can't eat in thier businesses. A school system in Texas told an eight year old he couldn't go to school because of his haircut. There's just too much government intervention in our lives.

+1

[dank]

I want the freedom of choice. "I" .

I don't disagree that we have lost many personal freedoms, and I do not want to see that continue. However, I think you have an odd concept of freedom of choice: You should have freedom of choice for what you personally want, perhaps straight pipes. Others should be denied it if they would choose to not have the noise from your bike wake them up in the middle of the night or deafen them at a a stoplight. It seems to me that if the majority of people vote for something and enact it, even a ban on loud pipes, that too reflects freedom of choice.

I tend toward the concept that your freedom to swing your fist ends at tip of my nose. In this instance, the sound waves from the bike with straight pipes are physically transcending that barrier. Are you suggesting that if you choose to discharge a shot gun in a crowded mall, you should be allowed to and it is everyone else's responsibility to either accept being shot or wear Kevlar? In situations like this some balancing of right of choice is needed in order to be fair to all involved and enable society to function.

I think the AMA has a pretty reasonable position on this issue. It strikes a good balance.

http://www.nonoise.org/resource/trans/highway/motorcycles/ama.htm

[dantama]

A few thoughts. It seems that the government has pretty much gone after those that are too annoying for the majority to be able to tolerate, or they get their panties in a bunch over safety.

Loud pipes fall into the first category. If you aren't passionate about bikes, then you would most likely hate the sound of loud pipes. Be it a Harley or a two stroke dirt bike. If you aren't passionate about bikes it sounds about as attractive as a chainsaw on a saturday morning.

Because most of the population isn't passionate about bikes, they will make enough ruckus to put a stop to it. They will win by having the numbers.

The other was the safetycrats. I think parents should be mandated to buckle their children up, but adults should be free to choose. It's silly that you can ride a dirt bike off any size jump you want, you can sky dive, free climb, or any of a million other dangerous pursuits......but you have to crash in your car safe?

I think you should be free to bonk your noggin off the dashboard as freely as off a granite cliff.

You touched a little bit on fast food type stuff; I think that consumers should be given full disclosure on products so that companies can't poison you without your knowledge. But once given full disclosure, if you want to get fat or smoke etc. knock yourself out.

[Top Cat]

I'm passionate about bikes and I HATE loud pipes.

Your sitting at a stoplight. No helmet. I hit the back of your bike just hard enough to knock you off it. You hit your head and die. Your family sues me for wrongfull death or vehicular manslaughter. If you had been wearing a helmet I would only have been sued for the price of fixing your bike. I think you should be wearing a helmet. You wearing a helmet affects more people than just you.

On the food issue I agree with you. You could probably tell that from my sig pic http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

dank, good site on the AMA's position. I'm going to post it on the thread I started about loudpipes, thanks.

[socwkbiker]

Because most of the population isn't passionate about bikes, they will make enough ruckus to put a stop to it. They will win by having the numbers.

The other was the safetycrats. I think parents should be mandated to buckle their children up, but adults should be free to choose. It's silly that you can ride a dirt bike off any size jump you want, you can sky dive, free climb, or any of a million other dangerous pursuits......but you have to crash in your car safe?

I think you should be free to bonk your noggin off the dashboard as freely as off a granite cliff.

You touched a little bit on fast food type stuff; I think that consumers should be given full disclosure on products so that companies can't poison you without your knowledge. But once given full disclosure, if you want to get fat or smoke etc. knock yourself out.

Herein lie some of the difficulties we as bikers and as a population in general face. If someone doesn't like something, ie motorcycles, then, in their opinion, they should all be banned or forced to be very quiet because that motorcycle is infringing on "my rights". This one person becomes an activist, gets others to go along and the next thing you know, they are out getting rules and laws enacted. What they didn't take into consideration at all was that the person riding also has rights. But they did what most of us don't do, they took action, complained and got what they wanted. The problem is they are only looking out for themselves, and, in this "me" generation, that has become the norm.

There is a similar mentality with the safetycrats (Dan, I like that one). Except they say that the corporation should have told them that there was a danger. The corporation, supposedly all knowing and always looking out for our best interest (yeah right) should have warned them that when they got into that wreck, they could be hurt because they wasn't wearing a seat belt. The corporation should have told them that riding without a helmet was dangerous. That eating 6 double quarter pounders or whoppers every day would make me fat.

People, our society looks for someone else to blame for all of its ills. It looks for a big cash payout. TC, the family of that person who chose to not wear a helmet should have no right to sue you because the rider chose to go lidless. Even though they made the choice, somehow it becomes your responsibility. Common sense, reasoning and rational thinking do not exist within our society as a whole because if it did, West Virginia would not have to enact a law that if someone breaks into your house and hurts themself they can sue you!

It's not just the government sticking its nose into our lives OB, it's those safetycrats, those whiners, those self-righteous know-it-alls who get the government to act.

The question is, what can we do to ensure that our rights are upheld or are protected?


I'll get off my soapbox now. And will you guys stop bringing up subjects that make me write so damn much??? My brain hurts!

[dantama]

them that there was a danger.[/b]


People, our society looks for someone else to blame for all of its ills. It looks for a big cash payout.

[/quote]

Good point there, I forgot about that angle, but so true.

[misunderstood]

I'm passionate about bikes and I HATE loud pipes.

Your sitting at a stoplight. No helmet. I hit the back of your bike just hard enough to knock you off it. You hit your head and die. Your family sues me for wrongfull death or vehicular manslaughter. If you had been wearing a helmet I would only have been sued for the price of fixing your bike. I think you should be wearing a helmet. You wearing a helmet affects more people than just you.

On the food issue I agree with you. You could probably tell that from my sig pic http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

dank, good site on the AMA's position. I'm going to post it on the thread I started about loudpipes, thanks.

Why'd you hit the back of his bike? He was just sittin there minding his own business.......................... ::) ;)

[dantama]

Your sitting at a stoplight. No helmet. I hit the back of your bike just hard enough to knock you off it. You hit your head and die. Your family sues me for wrongfull death or vehicular manslaughter. If you had been wearing a helmet I would only have been sued for the price of fixing your bike. I think you should be wearing a helmet. You wearing a helmet affects more people than just you.



I can't say I agree with your logic here. I should be required to be as safe as possible, so that you won't do so much damage while being negligent?

The same logic, taken a little further, would require pedestrians to wear helmets for the same reason; so that when you hit them you won't be so liable.

Truth be known, a lot of head injuries happen in cars also. Side curtain airbags will begin to help there, but plenty of heads take a bounce off of side pillars etc causing traumatic brain injuries.

But even though there is no disputing that car drivers and passengers would be safer with helmets, it doesn't happen except for in motor racing. Why?

Because most people find bikes annoying and will support the safetycrats putting bikes under their thumbs because it doesn't effect them.

Try to make a law saying everyone in a car has to have a helmet and you will no longer have numbers on your side. People will through a fit and it'll never happen.

Well I wasnt going to jump in on this but what the hell, In Canada there are two provinces that allow NO helmets and thats only for religion reason. "sh*tes" They are British Columbia and Manitoba. Ontario has been taken to court for human rights violation because of a religion cannot wear a helmet because of their head dress. Ok in Canada its very hard to sue anyone this has to do with Tort law etc I'm not a lawyer but you don't see to many individuals suing another. It's up to the insurance companies to handle payouts etc. Unlike in the USA you can sue a person for farting sideways if your so incline to.

Now getting to the point of wearing and not wearing a helmet. It's your choice sure but if you dont wear one then I really dont feel you have the right to sue. It is a piece of safety equipment. And before anyone jumps in YES I do promote safety..so I guess I am one of those safetycrats. Every little thing helps when it come to safety. Now here in Canada if it wasnt law to wear a helmet then the individual should sign a release because here in Canada its government medical that looks after you, and why should the tax payer be burden with the lack of forethought when it comes to safety. And on my closing note a husband and wife we're on a HOG trip in the states last summer when a car did come up from behind and ploughed into his wife bike throwing her off as she skid down the road on her right shoulder and right side of her head. She was wearing a helmet but she ended up with a broken shoulder and road rash on her right side. Ask her if she would go helmetless today? To each his own free free free but at the end of the day if there is an accident is it really just the person on the bike that will suffer if he/she is injuried. There for those of us that dont want to heaven forbid have our meals served through a straw or have our love one change our diapers because of the brain injury. There is two sides to every story I'm no fool not to realize this but no one can argue the fact when it comes to safety. And if you do then your just blowing sunshine.

Oh one more thing muffler noise does not travel forward of any bike at lease not the ones I ride....
Cheers Cookie

[dragon57]

we should all have the freedom to choose whether or not we wear a helmet, seat belt, or eat too much. The part where your lawyer ssues his, is a totally different soapbox!! we have become a nation of "minding everyone elses business"," lawsuit-happy" "candy a&#es" who have our decisions made for us by overpaid, beaurocrats who won't listen to what their constituants want them to do.!! They do what the namby-pamby , scared to do anything, cause they MIGHT BE INJURED !!
I personally wear a helmet, but, I HATE being told I have to by someone in the capital!!
I don't enjoy seeing fat people, so, I think we should ban them from eating too much!!
see? makes no sense !!!

[misunderstood]

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z202/davenpam324/various/new_popcornsmiley.gif

[cactusjack]

Here in the US, we have attorneys who advertise on TV. Some have predatory names like "The Eagle", "The Wolf", or my favorite - "The Hammer". They all say that they can get you the money "you're entitled to". They advertise during the day when people who are unemployed are watching the tube and they plant this concept of "if you are in a wreck, we'll get you that check". There's no such thing as personal responsibility anymore.

I live in a state where helmets are not required for those over 18. I think that's fair. I usually wear my helmet, but it gets hot here and sometimes I choose not to. I'm not stupid, I know I am exposing myself to greater risk. I accept the inherant dangers that come with riding a bike, and that many times wearing a helmet will save your life. So you are a quadriplegic for the rest of your life instead of just dead.

My personal feelings are that I am an adult, and I can smoke if I want to, drink if I want to, eat myself into a quadruple bypass, gamble away my paycheck and lots of other things that aren't good for me. I should be able to ride without a helmet or drive without a seatbelt, if that's what I want to do. It shouldn't be the governments business how I live my daily life, as long as I am not hurting others. Everybody dies sooner or later, that's just how it goes. If you take unneccesary risks, it may come sooner, but it isn't the governments job to decide that for me.

[Top Cat]

[quote:hs02rdc9]I'm passionate about bikes and I HATE loud pipes.

Your sitting at a stoplight. No helmet. I hit the back of your bike just hard enough to knock you off it. You hit your head and die. Your family sues me for wrongfull death or vehicular manslaughter. If you had been wearing a helmet I would only have been sued for the price of fixing your bike. I think you should be wearing a helmet. You wearing a helmet affects more people than just you.

On the food issue I agree with you. You could probably tell that from my sig pic http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

dank, good site on the AMA's position. I'm going to post it on the thread I started about loudpipes, thanks.

Why'd you hit the back of his bike? He was just sittin there minding his own business.......................... ::) ;)[/quote:hs02rdc9]

Well I had a lot going on that day. I was stressed out from work. My girlfriend just brokeup with me. I was watching a DVD on my portable player. I was eating a Big Mac. I was lost and trying to find directions on my GPS and was text messaging.
So you see it wasn't my fault at all. It was that no good punk biker. He should have been on the shoulder of the road where they belong. http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif
By the way, if you keep eating popcorn on every thread your going to get sick. ;)

[dank]

Oh one more thing muffler noise does not travel forward of any bike at lease not the ones I ride....
Cheers Cookie

Right.....and I suppose you can only smell the fart if you are standing behind a dog. http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

Then again, perhaps you are riding faster than the speed of sound. Concours 14, maybe. Nomad, not likely.

[oldbiker]

TC, You made my point. You want me to wear a helmet to protect you.

[misunderstood]

[quote:gk1w8vk9]

Why'd you hit the back of his bike? He was just sittin there minding his own business.......................... ::) ;)

Well I had a lot going on that day. I was stressed out from work. My girlfriend just brokeup with me. I was watching a DVD on my portable player. I was eating a Big Mac. I was lost and trying to find directions on my GPS and was text messaging.
So you see it wasn't my fault at all. It was that no good punk biker. He should have been on the shoulder of the road where they belong. http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif
By the way, if you keep eating popcorn on every thread your going to get sick. ;)[/quote:gk1w8vk9]

Maybe he could have cut thru all those distractions you had if his pipes were louder. Just sayin.................. http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

[jussmatt]

I've already said enough on these two subjects... I'll just say this time that Catcus Jack hit the nail on the head. Get rid of most of the ambulance chasing lawyers...most of the problems go away... Notice I said "MOST"... not all...

[socwkbiker]

And there you have it folks, proof positive that loud pipes do save lives! http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

[flightdoc]

loud pipes saves lives??? NOW I KNOW.
I agree with freedom.....but the saying goes: Freedom always comes with a price. Freedom is not free.
I don't want my taxes being used to support a "vegetable" laying in a rehab somewhere because they decided to exercice their freedom and not wear a helmet AND not have insurance. If you wish to ride without, then maybe you should be required to show proof that you can financially be cared for while in your free coma??
just a thought.

[socwkbiker]

[quote:no9tjxyo]Oh one more thing muffler noise does not travel forward of any bike at lease not the ones I ride....
Cheers Cookie

Right.....and I suppose you can only smell the fart if you are standing behind a dog. http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

Then again, perhaps you are riding faster than the speed of sound. Concours 14, maybe. Nomad, not likely.[/quote:no9tjxyo]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3128/2293889291_2145cdf303_o.jpg

[socwkbiker]

loud pipes saves lives??? NOW I KNOW.
I agree with freedom.....but the saying goes: Freedom always comes with a price. Freedom is not free.
I don't want my taxes being used to support a "vegetable" laying in a rehab somewhere because they decided to exercice their freedom and not wear a helmet AND not have insurance. If you wish to ride without, then maybe you should be required to show proof that you can financially be cared for while in your free coma??
just a thought.

In Texas there is a sticker we can get that indicates just that. You have to have taken either a riders safety course or have a life insurance police of over $100,000.

[misunderstood]

loud pipes saves lives??? NOW I KNOW.
I agree with freedom.....but the saying goes: Freedom always comes with a price. Freedom is not free.
I don't want my taxes being used to support a "vegetable" laying in a rehab somewhere because they decided to exercice their freedom and not wear a helmet AND not have insurance. If you wish to ride without, then maybe you should be required to show proof that you can financially be cared for while in your free coma??
just a thought.

I have a 'power of attorney' stating no life support. ;)

[flightdoc]

swb. That's a good one. The limits probably should be more like $1m. $100k goes in a flash for someone in a coma or something similar.
Each state should have something similar to the Texas requirement.

by the way...who's the one placing links to words in our threads?? I wish they wouldn't do that.

thanks

[Todd]

swb. That's a good one. The limits probably should be more like $1m. $100k goes in a flash for someone in a coma or something similar.
Each state should have something similar to the Texas requirement.

by the way...who's the one placing links to words in our threads?? I wish they wouldn't do that.

thanks


Links to words ??? I guess I'm lost...

[Top Cat]

TC, You made my point. You want me to wear a helmet to protect you.

OB,I hate it when that happens http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

flightdoc, link to words ???

If ya don't want to lose freedoms here is one way. Support all the groups that the do gooders go after whether you like or agree with them or not. When they go after smokers,bikers should be right there backing the smokers. When they start in on helmets and seatbelts, smokers and over eaters should be right there backing us. Get the picture. But how many of us are willing to back something we don't like to save someone else's freedom ?

[cactusjack]

If ya don't want to lose freedoms here is one way. Support all the groups that the do gooders go after whether you like or agree with them or not. When they go after smokers,bikers should be right there backing the smokers. When they start in on helmets and seatbelts, smokers and over eaters should be right there backing us. Get the picture. But how many of us are willing to back something we don't like to save someone else's freedom ?

Bingo. Excellent post.

[Yellow Jacket]

I think Benjamin Franklin said, "One who gives up Freedom for the hope of Safety deserves neither."

[dantama]

[quote:28t8r970]loud pipes saves lives??? NOW I KNOW.
I agree with freedom.....but the saying goes: Freedom always comes with a price. Freedom is not free.
I don't want my taxes being used to support a "vegetable" laying in a rehab somewhere because they decided to exercice their freedom and not wear a helmet AND not have insurance. If you wish to ride without, then maybe you should be required to show proof that you can financially be cared for while in your free coma??
just a thought.

I have a 'power of attorney' stating no life support. ;)[/quote:28t8r970]

+1

[cactusjack]

I think Benjamin Franklin said, "One who gives up Freedom for the hope of Safety deserves neither."

Pretty good...

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

[biscuitsngravy]

But NEVER, NEVER, NEVER have a microchip installed in your body!!
BnG

Or your kids, or your dogs for that matter.

[druid]

[quote author=topcat board=general thread=1204128867 post=1204137796]I'm passionate about bikes and I HATE loud pipes.

Your sitting at a stoplight. No helmet. I hit the back of your bike just hard enough to knock you off it. You hit your head and die. Your family sues me for wrongfull death or vehicular manslaughter. If you had been wearing a helmet I would only have been sued for the price of fixing your bike. I think you should be wearing a helmet. You wearing a helmet affects more people than just you.

If your lawyer is any good at all, he/she'd prove the rider contributed to the injuries to a great extent. I believ in wearin helmets, but his is a red herring argument.

[Todd]

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magazine04/scientific_files/fish.gif

Liability laws vary from state to state.....contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and modified ..... most mandatory laws, like the seat belt laws, have written in them that they cannot be used as a contributing factors in an injury.......just more evidence that we should get rid of most of the law makers and attorneys.

[socwkbiker]

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magazine04/scientific_files/fish.gif

Liability laws vary from state to state.....contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and modified ..... most mandatory laws, like the seat belt laws, have written in them that they cannot be used as a contributing factors in an injury.......just more evidence that we should get rid of most of the law makers and attorneys.

Big words Todd. Did you strain something coming up with those? http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

[Top Cat]

oldbiker, I been thinking it over. You said;
"TC, You made my point. You want me to wear a helmet to protect you."
Damn right, why should I have to pay because you are to irresponsible to protect yourself :)

druid, I don't know what a red herring argument is :-[

[socwkbiker]

It's a reference to the old Soviet Union. That or something smells fishy. Matt, did you spread your legs again? http://s2.images.proboards.com/shocked.gif

One of the greatest arguments in the motorcycle world is whether or not to wear helmets. Regardless of your stance, shouldn't it come down to personal choice?

[jussmatt]

It's a reference to the old Soviet Union. That or something smells fishy. Matt, did you spread your legs again? http://s2.images.proboards.com/shocked.gif

Sorry... I thought it was an SBD.... guess it was an SWB instead!!! LOL!

[socwkbiker]

LMAO!!

[Todd]

[quote:1ubrrtor]http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magazine04/scientific_files/fish.gif

Liability laws vary from state to state.....contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and modified ..... most mandatory laws, like the seat belt laws, have written in them that they cannot be used as a contributing factors in an injury.......just more evidence that we should get rid of most of the law makers and attorneys.

Big words Todd. Did you strain something coming up with those? http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif[/quote:1ubrrtor]

Dang...sorry, I let my work personality out for just a second...I'll try to refrain from now on!!!


OK...I've had enough of the helmet and loud pipe arguements/discussions.....from now on its speed scroll.....speed scroll....speed scroll.... ;) ;) ;) ;) http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif

[jussmatt]

You and me both Todd... sometimes it's better to stay out of the kitchen!

[cactusjack]

A modern example of a "red herring" is in the movie Saw. Determining the identity of the psychopathic serial killer is one of the goals of his trapped victims (Dr. Lawrence Gordon and Adam Faulkner, who are shackled by their feet to some pipes in a hidden industrial bathroom). Suspicion is thrown first on Dr. Gordon, one of the kidnapped players in the psychopath's sick game, and later on Zep Hindle, an orderly at Dr. Gordon's hospital. At the end of the movie, Zep, who was earlier revealed as the kidnapper of Dr. Gordon's family, approaches the two kidnapped victims. Adam, who was earlier shot by Dr. Gordon and appears to be dead, gains consciousness and beats Zep to death. While Dr. Gordon attempts to escape before bleeding to death because Dr. Gordon had previously sawed off his foot to escape the pipe, Adam searches Zep's body for a key to his chain. He instead finds a tape recorder, describing the rules that the orderly must play the game by. Finally, the killer is revealed as the thought-to-be-dead cellmate of the victims, a man named John Kramer. Such plot twists are shown to be foundational to the use of the red herring.

--Wikipedia

[Todd]

A modern example of a "red herring" is in the movie Saw. Determining the identity of the psychopathic serial killer is one of the goals of his trapped victims (Dr. Lawrence Gordon and Adam Faulkner, who are shackled by their feet to some pipes in a hidden industrial bathroom). Suspicion is thrown first on Dr. Gordon, one of the kidnapped players in the psychopath's sick game, and later on Zep Hindle, an orderly at Dr. Gordon's hospital. At the end of the movie, Zep, who was earlier revealed as the kidnapper of Dr. Gordon's family, approaches the two kidnapped victims. Adam, who was earlier shot by Dr. Gordon and appears to be dead, gains consciousness and beats Zep to death. While Dr. Gordon attempts to escape before bleeding to death because Dr. Gordon had previously sawed off his foot to escape the pipe, Adam searches Zep's body for a key to his chain. He instead finds a tape recorder, describing the rules that the orderly must play the game by. Finally, the killer is revealed as the thought-to-be-dead cellmate of the victims, a man named John Kramer. Such plot twists are shown to be foundational to the use of the red herring.

--Wikipedia

OH THANKS...now you ruined the ending for me cactusjack http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif j/k

[dantama]

But was it really a red herring in this thread, or a straw man?

[Todd]

But was it really a red herring in this thread, or a straw man?

Dude, we gotta get you outta that hospital!!!!!!!

[tomk]

I'm sorry guys, I've been reading this for a while and I have to add my two cents -- I hope you forgive me!

IMHO, this is really easy.

1) If you want less government regulations as I do: don't vote for Unions, Democrats, Dictators or Communists.
2) You hate loud pipes as do I: Make a legal definition of what "loud pipes" is numerically, don't just say it, tell us what your "loud" limit is. Give us something to measure against so it can become law.
3) Loud pipes saves lives? If you disagree, why don't we just have all the emergency vehicles and any alarm system that's loud, stop with the sirens. After all, they don't really need them because they're just making noise. Right?

As I said, I hope you guys forgive me but please consider the above.

[misunderstood]

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z202/davenpam324/various/forum_2f455681_two_cents_small.jpg

[Top Cat]

3) Loud pipes saves lives? If you disagree, why don't we just have all the emergency vehicles and any alarm system that's loud, stop with the sirens. After all, they don't really need them because they're just making noise. Right?

The sad part is, your probably serious.
I hear an ambulance or police car coming up behind me as they have their sirens emitting the sound waves MOSTLY FORWARD.
A motorcycle exhaust projects its sound MOSTLY REARWARD.
So I guess your analogy makes sense if the motorcycle is coming at me BACK WARDS http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

[socwkbiker]

TC, how did you know that's how I ride?

[tomk]

3) Loud pipes saves lives? If you disagree, why don't we just have all the emergency vehicles and any alarm system that's loud, stop with the sirens. After all, they don't really need them because they're just making noise. Right?

The sad part is, your probably serious.
I hear an ambulance or police car coming up behind me as they have their sirens emitting the sound waves MOSTLY FORWARD.
A motorcycle exhaust projects its sound MOSTLY REARWARD.
So I guess your analogy makes sense if the motorcycle is coming at me BACK WARDS http://s2.images.proboards.com/grin.gif

Sorry TC, but I am serious and quite possibly, I may be sad too. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in super loud straight pipes but a little sound is a good thing -- just like warning lights and sirens.

I get it that you're very passionate about loud pipes. But if you think that danger comes only from the front or the rear, I must strongly disagree with you.

I've been there several times on a quiet bike when someone just moved over into my lane. Sure, they appologized after I've wildly manuvered my bike out of the way. Lucky that I had a place to go. Every time, they told me the same thing: I'm sorry, I didn't even see you! The last time was on my Nad before I put my baggers on.

I always try to stay out of the area next to a vehicle but sometimes it doesn't work out that way. I believe that any sensory input that I am there is a good thing. I'd rather be called "sad" than laying on the pavement anytime.