Edit: Plasmatron said it better than me. I should stay out of this thread because of many reasons! :fume:
Who said anything about fault? Quote me somewhere where I am laying blame…oh I can quote myself laying blame…hold on Traveller. Here we go: [quote=“Mordeth”] The fault is obviously the scooter riders. And your friend shouldn’t feel any guilt…I wouldn’t.[/quote] I was agreeing with you in saying it was the scooter’s fault…so what are you whining about again?
[quote=“X3M”]Only 4 peole I knew in my life have been killed in traffic accidents.
The 2 first died as a result of crazy teenage driving in a car going off a cliff.
The 2 others was hit by one motorcycle at high speed when 3 of them were walking along the road. They were killed instantly, but the motorcycle driver and the third friend got only a few minor injuries.
High speed driving with either car or motorcycle can kill both you and others, so don’t be so damned cocky.[/quote]
I’m not being cocky. And I’m fully aware that a motorbike can kill a person. Check out my motorbike vs van post. A big bike hit a van in Taiwan and the driver of the van died. I’m perfectly aware that a bike can kill someone. I also know that lightning can kill someone…but I still go to work in the rain.
[quote=“Traveller”]Plasmatron, excellen post
I just hope that Mordeth realises the truth in it, but i wont be surprised if he does not. [/quote]
Sorry, I’m too stupid to understand Plasma’s posts. Maybe you could sum it up for me Traveller?..possibly dumb it down a bit? I’m betting you can’t. 
And Tyio Ma, good post. Let’s look at your main points…shall we?
[quote=“Tyio Ma”]
- You keep clinging to fatalities, silently ignoring my point that NO ACCIDENTS are acceptable. You MUST count in all accidents where damage was done to vehicles, health or life. We may omit the cases that ended in just a few scratches, but only them. [/quote]
Umm, Ok.
[quote=“Tyio Ma”]
2. You mistakenly remove fault from consideration. Vehicles are supposed to drive normally. While they do so, they are not accountable for accidents happening to them. Accidents wouldn’t happen if everyone would drive normally. That means, in Traveller’s example, increase stats counter for reckless scooters, not for normal cars. The scooter was the OFFENDER, the car was the VICTIM, even more so due to idiot judge. Feel the difference. Potential victims are not obliged to avoid possible dangers (but they may choose to do so just to keep themselves safer).[/quote]
I’m not mistakenly removing anything. It was my statement that we are arguing here…and my original statement did not include “fault”…so to try and throw it in later is irrelevant. We were simply discussing if I were to take my bike to work(riding fast)…or my car (riding the limit)…which would be more likely to be involved in the loss of someone’s life. And I’m saying it would be the car. Very simple statement.
[quote=“Tyio Ma”]
3. You confirmed that your stats are home-made, obtained from random assumptions and some general figures. That’s not the way to produce accurate and reliable statistics. Give me figures and formula that you used. Until then, I take your stats as plain wrong. [/quote]
Just go pick up a newspaper Tyio Ma…or read one regularly…and see how often cars kill people in relation to bikes. And then keep in mind that there are more bikes on the road than cars.
[quote=“Tyio Ma”]
So here we are. Provocative statement incorrectly derived from wrong source. Your logical chain is flawed in every node. [/quote]
And your logic is perfection! Nice to know you think so highly of yourself… :bravo: .
Mordeth
Not sure if youare being deliberately obtuse or whether you actually need Plasm’a post dumbed down, but seeing as you know him, i have to assume the former.
Cars themselves do not kill people, in the same way that bikes or even guns for that matter do not kill people, it is the idiots driving, riding and firing them that kill people. So please, let us get away from your saying cars kill people as it is wrong.
Whilst i will agree that in accidents between cars and scooters, the scooter rider is more likely to come off worse, what you have failed to include is WHOSE fault it is the accident occured. Please dont quote any taiwan source, as we all know the ridiculous way they apportion blame, so it will not be worth the time it takes to post it.
If as is highly likely, based not just on my experiences, but those of friends and people posting here, that greater than 50% of such accidents are caused by the stupidity of the scooter rider, then it is their fault, and the car driver and their car are innocent victims. Not the other way round.
That is not to say though that stupidity on the part of car drivers does not cause the death of scooter riders.
If you are doing a 150kmh on a 50 knh speed limit road, then the time you have to react to any given situation is one third of the time the car driver would have, which would in most circumstances give them the time to take the necessary evasive action, and if they did not have the tiome, then sure as hell the bike rider does not.
People here are not attuned, nor is there any reason why they should be, to judging time and distance based on those kind of speeds, so by your riding at those speeds does actually make you more liable for an accident.
Plasmatron, most comprehensive. I don’t see any way to give better explanations.
It’s not. That’s why I got interested in practicing it a little bit. I’m honestly trying to uncover and display logical flaws in your reasoning, with moderate success up to the moment. Why you? Because you provide me with material for analysis most generously It’s just starting to take too much of my time, which I am supposed to spend on my job duties 
[quote=“Traveller”]
If as is highly likely, based not just on my experiences, but those of friends and people posting here, that greater than 50% of such accidents are caused by the stupidity of the scooter rider, then it is their fault, and the car driver and their car are innocent victims. Not the other way round.
If you are doing a 150kmh on a 50 knh speed limit road, then the time you have to react to any given situation is one third of the time the car driver would have, which would in most circumstances give them the time to take the necessary evasive action, and if they did not have the tiome, then sure as hell the bike rider does not.
People here are not attuned, nor is there any reason why they should be, to judging time and distance based on those kind of speeds, so by your riding at those speeds does actually make you more liable for an accident.[/quote]
I’m not here to argue these things. These are not points I was discussing. My roommate has had 4 accidents involving cars…everyone was the car’s fault. I’ve had roughly 6 one of which was my fault…and the other 5 (roughly) the car’s. Plus I’m sure most of our scooter riding posters have had the odd accdient with a car…and again I’m betting it’s usually the car’s fault. My co-worker was on a turn-off when the car beside him moved over and sandwiched him into the curb recently…I can’t even think of a someone I personally know telling me a story where the scooter was at fault (Morons, please read this: Yes, I know these stories exist…I’m just saying I haven’t heard any, that I can remember).
Anyone else want to comment on this one? When car and scooter meet roughly…is it usually the car’s fault? Or the scooter’s? Considering the reduced visibility and hearing with regards to cars…I’m pretty sure it would be them…not to mention every 4th car on the road seems to be on their cell phone :loco: .
In the time i have been here, several years, i have been involved in, either as the driver or a passenger, in five accidents. Four involved scooters and the fifth was car to car. On all ocassions it was the other parties fault.
Two of them involved scooter riders barreling out of some side street onto a main road without even looking and then wondering why they got tagged. On one ocassion, it was the car i was in, plus two other bikes that all tagged him at about the same time.
By your own words Mordeth, scooters/bikes outnumber cars here quite significantly, i believe the ratio is about 4 to 1, yet you still try to insist that car drivers are responsible for more accidents, the law of averages if nothing else would be against you. What about all the scooter to scooter accidents, some of which end up in a fatality.
Your comment on people using cell phones whilst on the road, i would agree with, but this is not restricted to just car users, you see way to many riders doing the same thing. Also next time start checking to see how many riders ride whilst using mp3 players and the like, another highly dangerous past time.
Mordeth, i dont know where you live, but from your posts i get the impression it is a more rural area than say Taipei, and that difference alone can skew quite significantly accidents rates etc.
I was backed over once by a taxi who trapped me under his cab as my tail pipe burned into my leg–I wasn’t moving.
Rear ended by a taxi at night in Taipei on a very deserted An He Road, at a stop light-I wasn’t moving.
Bumped by a bus on He Ping East Road who was trying to run a red light–I wasn’t moving.
I’ll take my chances with the speed thing, they seem not be able to hit moving targets.
Hmm… OK, I’ve run through the thread again.
So this is your original statement. Let’s see… Nobody objects it, but people step up against your implicit conclusion and the logic you use to draw it. That’s where we get two points of argument:
A. Fast riding is OK and acceptable.
B. Because a bike is not a blue truck.
Well, nobody objects to B but many point out that it doesn’t lead to A. What’s next?
Seems that arguments heat everyone up. And in the heat you make several mistakes.
- You misread the actual messages coming your way and take objections to A for objections to B. Or rather, you adhere to A, but defending it explicitly is plain stupid, so instead you try to support B somehow, ignoring the fact that originally B=>A was false.
- To make B more dramatic you substitute speeding truck with non-speeding car basing upon several cases you saw with your own eyes and some front page hot news. That’s bad logic, and people react to it accordingly.
- You introduce the concepts of danger to other’s lives and cars killing people, at the same time incorrectly removing fault from consideration. Posing danger means being guilty of ignorance, negligence or ill-intentions threatening others’ well-being. And killing is an active action, meaning you are guilty of someone’s death. Certainly you were a danger for the people you killed. In your example, a scooter was a big danger to himself and a minor danger to the car, and he killed himself, along the way damaging the car and the driver’s finances, peace of mind and probably other aspects of his life as well.
So that’s where your statement B becomes C: “Any car is more dangerous than a speeding bike” with dubious supportive facts and obviously wrong reasoning. Now people who only objected to A object to C as well.
[quote=“Mordeth”]Nope, I’m saying that I do ENDANGER LIVES…but when I drive a car at normal speeds I ENDANGER LIVES MORE.
I’m just pointing out that every single car/truck/van/bus/SUV on the road represents a greater danger than I.
So since there are more bikes/scooters on the roads than cars…and the majorty of traffic deaths are caused by cars. Yes…I still do believe that driving a car normally is more dangerous to others, than riding a bike quickly.
A person has a better chance of killing someone (regardless of fault) driving a car normally…than I do, riding a bike fast.
I’m LESS LIKELY TO BE INVOLVED IN THE DEATH OF ANOTHER BY RIDING MY BIKE FAST…THAN YOU ARE DRIVING A CAR NORMALLY.[/quote]
Well, eventually your C evolved to something probably correct, but already irrelevant to the topic and original points due to mistakes made previously and the form it has taken. Being passively involved in someone’s death means you had no influence on his safety, while his speeding may very well have contributed to the sad outcome.
After all this, let me repeat. This discussion would be more comprehensive if we included non-fatal accidents into account.
That probably also explains Mordeth’s experience. When I hear a roar and see a moron doing over 90kph on his bike weaving in traffic, I have no chance to determine if this is a nice-guy-riding-expert-fellow-forumosan, so I’d rather slow down and refrain from maneuvering until he’s well ahead. But you know… if words could kill, the traffic here would be much easier, especially without 90% of current scooters population.
AARRGH!!! :fume: Switching and mixing subjects, concepts and terms at will. Car’s fault, scooter’s fault, regardless of fault, nobody’s fault, no ill intentions, car riding the limit, car driving normally, car driven by moronic asshole, slow scooter, fast bike, blue truck, all interchangeable. This is not the discussion I want to take part in. Cheers! Make love, not accidents! 
Hey Tyio Ma Welcome to The Vrrooom!! Vrrroom!! Room! Baby!!
Hope you make it back!! 
That probably also explains Mordeth’s experience. When I hear a roar and see a moron doing over 90kph on his bike weaving in traffic, I have no chance to determine if this is a nice-guy-riding-expert-fellow-forumosan, so I’d rather slow down and refrain from maneuvering until he’s well ahead. But you know… if words could kill, the traffic here would be much easier, especially without 90% of current scooters population.[/quote]
Huh? Over 90 is moronic? I don’t think I’ve done below 90…what’s it like? 
No use. Me sees. Speed logic no together. No brain no pain.
Busy street yes. Me here no time. Good has all. 