Had the last of the memorial services yesterday. It's pretty amazing to see the outpouring of care and support from the motorcycle community for these guys and their families. If nothing else, it has drawn the community much closer together. Very moving, and it makes me proud to count myself among those ranks.
There has been a lot of controversy over the news reporting and the slants of those reports in regard to the wreck--slants which give a more negative connotation to the riders than perhaps exists in reality. Here is more to the story, from the surviving riders:
-The illegal pass: The 29 year old rider was passing his group on a double yellow line. The line is double yellow since there is a moderate corner at that point, although vision is not obstructed through the corner. The rider actually made the pass, and the accident occurred as he tried to turn back in. His bike was a lowered Softail. Since he was carrying a lot of speed as he got around the group, it appeared that he actually over-leaned the bike, and washed the rear. He lost his steering ability, and ran head-on into a pickup truck.
Undoubtedly, this pass was indeed illegal, and a poor judgement call, and certainly beyond the abilities of the motorcycle to achieve successfully. This singular incident was perhaps the only thing "done wrong" of the entire event. But I do not rate it to the level of crime or even condemn the act. We all in our riding break the minor traffic laws on occasion (on purpose or by accident)--be it speed limits, road markings, or stop signs. This was a case of the same, unfortunately with a bad ending. Those are the risks we take in breaking those minor laws, and the sometimes unfortunate result.
-Neither rider was wearing a helmet (and some reports state incorrectly that no helmets were worn by the group): The two riders killed were not wearing helmets. The remainder of the group was wearing half helmets at a minimum.
This is one of those cases, where I truly feel that data gets skewed. To examine this wreck critically, helmets would not have increased chance of survival for either rider. The first rider hit the pickup truck head-on, and then was run over. The second rider hit the pickup broadside at full highway speed. A helmet would not have decreased the internal injuries each rider suffered to any degree.
Now, understand clearly: I am not trying to advocate not wearing helmets, or impart that it was not a wise choice on the part of either rider, but I do believe that this bit of reporting served only to promote a helmet agenda, as helmet wearing would have played no part in the chance of survival in this crash. Fortunately, the surviving crash victim's head did not hit the ground (had a half helmet on), or he would have been suffering the effects of the poor protection of a half helmet. I find it ironic how the simple presence of a helmet somehow morally exhonerates an individual, regardless of actual protection, or relevance to the situation. As long as you are wearing a helmet, you can be in shorts, flips, and a tanktop, and the news report of your fatal wreck will not report that the rider "was not wearing a leather jacket" or "was not wearing boots". But if the helmet is missing, an example needs to be made.
-Alcohol was a factor: Had these guys dipped a pinky finger in liquor, and touched it to their tongues, alcohol would have "been a factor". This is perhaps the most worthless and misleading statement of the entire report.
It is true. However, the highest BAC of the group was a 0.06%, or 0.02 below the legal limit to operate a motor vehicle in Montana. Most of the riders blew zeros on site administered tests. This means that not a single rider in the group was breaking any law, and had they been pulled over by law enforcement and checked, all of them would have been released to continue down the road.
I will be very clear here: I do not condone drinking and riding, and I'm not implying that even legal amounts of alcohol do not impair judgement and reaction times. I don't promote drinking and riding. My gripe with this bit of reporting is that even though no law was broken, these two very well liked and respected young men have been portrayed as the stereotypical "wild, drunken Harley Bikers", when the fact is that one of them made a single poor judgement call on his bike and it ended very badly. This portrayal will be their legacy, even though they had done nothing that the majority of the population of does legally on a daily basis. That is unfair at best. I've already overheard on multiple occassions the populace's opinion that the riders were blind drunk--inferred from the mere mention that 'alcohol was a factor'.
Having heard the gamut of 'coulda-woulda-shoulda' during the last week, I have determined for myself a few things. These events are called accidents--they happen in cars, trucks, and walking down the street, too. The focus of this in the wrong place. We all make mistakes on our bikes (cars, trucks...). How often do you have that sweaty palm moment after one, as you realize how bad it "could have been"? This wreck was one of those instances where the riders didn't make it through--a much rarer occurance than the times rider mistakes come out ok. The surrounding incidents reported would more than likely have made no impact whatever on the outcome of this wreck, and therefore serve absolutely no purpose on which to dwell. There is not a rider who has not at some point raced, cornered fast, or taken a risk he/she should not have. It happens, and to varying degrees may arguably be why many of us ride. Coupled with that comes the inherent danger that we will crash, and that we could die in that crash. Elbows and knees make poor fenders, and often those crashes are fatal.
The point is that I'm not trying to endorse what these riders did. But I want to clarify that parts of what they did is not unlike what many of us do (sometimes daily) in our cars and on our bikes with successful results and never think about. And sometimes it catches you. Nothing more, and nothing less.
Ride safe guys...we don't need any more of this.
