View Full Version : More troops killed by motorcycle accidents then OEF
brewmonkey
02-06-2006, 11:28
According to the article below we have had more troops killed in motorcycle accidents since Sept 11th then we have had killed in combat in Afghanistan and a good portion of those seem to be coming from the Marine Corps.
It is sad to think that these men are making it through a tour of duty, sometimes multiple tours, in OIF and OEF only to come home and die in this manner. This is a serious problem as many of those who riding those bikes seem to be saying it is akin to the adrenaline rush they experienced during their tours. It makes me wonder what those others who don't ride are doing to get their "high"?
Are these deaths a result of recklessness or the fact that novice riders are buying bikes outside their capabilities? Are these numbers any different to a similar period prior to the start of OEF/OIF? What are commanders going to do to get these troops help? If they are turning into adrenaline junkies what are those who are not riders doing to get their "high"?
This is a serious problem and even though the commands seem to be aware of it this does not sound to me like an added safety class is really going to solve the problem, or really make a dent in it.
http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/automotive/6781320/detail.html
This issue was addressed while I was stationed in Hawaii. By addressed I mean it was talked about and had a minor implementation of rules, regs and courses that one must meet before being approved to ride a bike on post. That's great to ensure that the rider is safe on post and in the 3+ year period I was stationed at Schofield, no motorcycle rider lost his/ her life on post.
Off post was a completely different affair. In one week alone (6 days) we lost 3 soldiers to fatal motorcycle accidents. The command had good intent in creating a motorcycle rider course. Basically ensuring a person could handle to bike on small obstacles, balance it while moving slowly, etc.
Of the two killed in that one week both were doing speeds in excess of 100mph. It is a chronic problem that has been around for a long while and will only get worse unless we (NCO's and Officers) add this to things that will get you hammered. People love thrills, some are more apt to take bigger risks to meet the need for adrenaline.
We as soldiers take calculated risks and that may engender a slight sense of invincibility, especially after withstanding and addressing sustained combat operations. A soldier may miss excitement and the lure of danger. After some of the experiences the young men and women go through they may not get the "high" they got from the old things they used to do. At that point they will seek out other thrills that meet the need. I'm sure that those of past generations and the QP's on this board have had a handfull of run-ins with this mentality and problems like this.
Anyone have any recommendations on how to address this and fix it. Realistic approaches are appreciated, humorous ones are as well. As an NCO I'm sure that I'll need to counsel a soldier on behavior like this. Hopefully I get the chance to address it before PVT Snuffy becomes PVT Snuffed.
Ban motorcycles. It is draconian but it solves the problem.
The Reaper
02-06-2006, 14:20
Ban motorcycles. It is draconian but it solves the problem.
Might as well ban alcohol consumption as well, it seems to be working in theater and is a factor in most of the bike accidents.
And marriage, as it is the primary cause of divorce.
Finally, you can add cars and trucks, as most of the other vehicle accidents seem to involve them. At least require five point belts, a full roll cage and a helmet.:rolleyes:
TR
Roguish Lawyer
02-06-2006, 15:54
TR:
You forgot to say we should ban guns. :D
RL
Bravo1-3
02-06-2006, 15:59
I'm not sure that TR is capable of uttering those words in an affirmative context. :D
Roguish Lawyer
02-06-2006, 16:18
I'm not sure that TR is capable of uttering those words in an affirmative context. :D
He did talk about banning alcohol . . . :D
The Reaper
02-06-2006, 16:19
He did talk about banning alcohol . . . :D
I can always make my own alcohol.
Much harder to make my own firearms.
TR
Roguish Lawyer
02-06-2006, 16:21
I can always make my own alcohol.
Much harder to make my own firearms.
TR
LOL -- I'll bet you'd manage if required.
I can always make my own alcohol.
Much harder to make my own firearms.
TR
We were going to do a little job with the FBI and had to do a little prep work at a range. Prior to departure from Bragg we were doing a little puttering around in the team room and built some home made guns.
When we got up with the FBI guys they were quite impressed with the home made jobs we pulled out of the team box. We covered from short to long guns and 9mm, .45 cal then up to 12 gg shotgun. They all worked rather well but after the range firing the FBI guys advised us that it might be best to get rid of them prior to coming home.:D
We did and they were happy.
Pete
For $9,000 a 20 year-old kid who has never ridden anything faster than a bicycle can walk into a Yamaha/Honda/Kawasaki/Suzuki dealer and buy a bike that will do 10-second 1/4 miles and hit 165 mph - showroom stock.
And those are the 600cc bikes, forget about the 750's, 900's, and 1,000's.
Kind of like giving a first-time shooter a .300 Win Mag bolt gun to learn on.
Nobody wants to learn basic handling skills on something less powerful like a 250 or whatever since those bikes are "uncool."
Here's the formula:
(inexperience)(youth)(bravado) + rocketship with throttle = fatal combination.
colmurph
02-09-2006, 15:24
I'll wager that in most of the motorcycle fatalities alcohol played a part. I think nationwide, the percentage of alchohol related motor vehicle fatalities is something on the order of 80%. Every motorcycle fatality that I recollect during over 30 years of riding and being in the military had alchohol factored in to the cause. The kids may be safe on Post but once they get off post and have a few for the road they start doing stupid things, the stupidest of which is trying to ride after they've been drinking.
CoLawman
02-09-2006, 23:35
I'll wager that in most of the motorcycle fatalities alcohol played a part. I think nationwide, the percentage of alchohol related motor vehicle fatalities is something on the order of 80%. Every motorcycle fatality that I recollect during over 30 years of riding and being in the military had alchohol factored in to the cause. The kids may be safe on Post but once they get off post and have a few for the road they start doing stupid things, the stupidest of which is trying to ride after they've been drinking.
Actually Nationally the percentage of fatalities associated with alcohol is around 40%. When motorcycles are looked at separately the percentage climbs to close to 50%. Obviously these are national averages and does not give us a glimpse at a particular locale.
Interesting there's such interest in regulating the lives of soldiers and people in general. I wait for the call to remove the class VI and alcohol beverages from the shelves of on post stores.
Soldiers die drowning so, no swimming without a floatation device. Floatation vests while boating goes without saying it's law but lets add a helmet and seatbelts to be "safe". Snow skiing well just too hazardous even with a helmet there’s still leg and spinal injuries, surfing and SCUBA too, no way there’s sharks. Skydiving for sport, too risky, save it for the insertion.
They pulled adult magazines from the shelves to keep the warriors pure. May as well place those seedy off post places off limits too, a soldier could get mugged drink or marry the wrong type of person. Worse still they may tarnish their purity having sex.
Then there's fast food, sugar, sodas, ice cream, take all that away so soldiers are healthier. Surely don’t need the Mess providing it.
Let’s just put speed governors on the vehicles so they don’t go faster than 45, and since GPS is a success lets make a computerized speed governor that works with GPS to recognize the speed limit in the area the vehicle is in. Why do soldiers need a vehicle anyway, there's a post bus and taxi's. A vehicle is too much of an expense for the soldier.
Speaking of upwards-spiraling insurance rates lets put regulations on where people can build or live. No flood plains or mudslide areas, places like that.
Well hot damn, there’s just no end to laws legislation regulation and policy that can be done to limit risky behavior.
The only real reason to be on a motorcycle at all is to be speeding at night with a Kevlar, NVD’s and IR headlight with a pack and weapon anyway. :rolleyes:
(the sarcasm, irony, humor smilie is lit)
You can get a ued fast bike for a whole lot less than $9000.
Alzo there are a whole bunch of us who have disproved your formula.
You are not completely wrong, but should we add avoid parachuting or maybe a combat MOS as well?
Fucking spoilsports need to let us irresponsible yahoos to our own fates.;)
Some of us old farts have managed to live thru lives of riding and learned some temperence, but those 4-wheeled assassins are everywhere still.
Couple here dodged a truck, hit a deer and died.
In the 60's "Meridian Motorcycles" in Fayettenam launched many a 20 year olddown that long ramp to the street.
"You sure you know how to ride one of these, kid?" "Yah, sure!" ZOOM!
A nw Bonneville was $1195.
Nobody I new got killed then. A few got killed in Veet-Nam...ban war?
Someof us are still riding.
Matter of personal choice.
You can get a ued fast bike for a whole lot less than $9000.
Alzo there are a whole bunch of us who have disproved your formula.
You are not completely wrong, but should we add avoid parachuting or maybe a combat MOS as well?
Fucking spoilsports need to let us irresponsible yahoos to our own fates.;)
Some of us old farts have managed to live thru lives of riding and learned some temperence, but those 4-wheeled assassins are everywhere still.
Couple here dodged a truck, hit a deer and died.
In the 60's "Meridian Motorcycles" in Fayettenam launched many a 20 year olddown that long ramp to the street.
"You sure you know how to ride one of these, kid?" "Yah, sure!" ZOOM!
A nw Bonneville was $1195.
Nobody I new got killed then. A few got killed in Veet-Nam...ban war?
Someof us are still riding.
Matter of personal choice.
Yeah, you can get a used bike for less than 9k, but new bikes are still pretty cheap, even for a GI.
As far as the formula goes, a fool is a fool, period. Riding over your limits is foolish for anyone of any age. So is climbing with worn rope, or doing a 100 ft. night dive by yourself. Yet people still do those things and more...
There are two types of risk. "Calculated" risk is something like static-line parachuting. Proper equipment, training, methods, etc., reduce the real risks to very small, predictable, levels.
"Foolhardy" risk is the risk taken by fools. Rappelling on a 120ft. mountain coil left exposed in the backyard sun all summer would be an example of foolhardy risk taking. Only a fool would use that rope for critical support.
The original question in part was:
"Are these deaths a result of recklessness or the fact that novice riders are buying bikes outside their capabilities?"
In many cases, the answer is "yes" they are riding over their capabilities. It doesn't mean "ban fast motorcycles."
I've been riding motorcycles for 35 years, and have had a motorcyle endorsement on my driver's license for 25 years.
On and off road, I've pushed the envelope more than a few times, gone down a few times, and been in a few situations where skill was the only thing that saved my ass from dying. Skill counts for a LOT. The less skill you have as a rider, the less likely you are to survive any kind of emergency situation.
Young GI's did it when you were at Bragg, they did it 20 years ago when I was there, and there's some kid who's going to the Kawasaki dealer tomorrow to do the same thing.
The point isn't about banning anything. It's that fools will do foolish things. Buying a bike with 75 more horsepower than you need to learn basic skills on is foolish.
Ban no, enjoy "dangerous toys," yes. But, when foolish people do foolish things, nobody should be surprised if something bad happens.
nobody should be surprised if something bad happens.[/QUOTE]
Nobody ever was.
But we were all SF volunteers and taking on extra big challenges was part of the driving force.
Foolish or not it's who we were. Some of us went on to where that atitude cme in pretty handy
My advice to youngsters is to stay off motorcycles, but if they insist, then I sure don't give any advice on being careful-that comes with age and senility.
A stately 75 on the road is enough for my old soul these days.
Anyways tha's about as far as I can kick this. Just wish I was young enough to be on one of them UW A teams in Afghanistan. I know that's foolish, but I did 15 months on one in RVN. That was fooish, I lived thru it and have memories I wouldnt give up fer nuthin'.
Might as well ban alcohol consumption as well, it seems to be working in theater and is a factor in most of the bike accidents.
And marriage, as it is the primary cause of divorce.
TR
Funny you should mention that - According to the Pentagon 56,000 divorces in the Active duty Army, National Guard and Reserves since 2001.
I thought this part of the article was interesting -
Younger troops favor shrieking, race-bred sport bikes while officers and senior noncommissioned officers often cruise on the more laid-back Harleys. Parking lots for special operations units sometimes look like someone issued an order allowing only motorcycles and pickups. :cool:
Ban motorcycles. It is draconian but it solves the problem.
You forgot the smilie. When I was in Thailand the AFT Cdr was an Air Force General. He did just that, banned motorcycles because they were too "dangerous".
Biggernshit, I had to lease a car and totaled it, and almost myself, within a month. So much for that theory.:(
OTOH I feel the above stats fail to take into consideration the relative numbers of MC riders vs. military in combat.