[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Jan 14, 2005, at 8:54 PM, Steve Makohin wrote:

> You are confusing the "utilization" of a device with the "usefullness" 
> of a device. For example, I find my car's seatbelts to be very useful, 
> even though I have never utilized them by restraining me in an 
> vehicular incident (I haven't had a meaningful one). Ditto with the 
> fire and theft insurance I carry on all my vehicles, house and 
> contents. I make use of these things not because I have needed them in 
> the past, but because I perceive the cost of getting and using these 
> things to justify the risks that they mitigate.

Insurance is a form of gambling. You are betting you will need 
insurance and the insurance company is betting you won't. I guess the 
same could be said for ABS. ABS is good (as long as it works)  but, I 
am not going to limit my bike purchases based on whether or not that 
bike has ABS. I would be missing out on a lot of great motorcycles.

> Using your "reasoning", we may similary (and wrongfully) conclude that 
> if a helmeted rider rides a motorcycle for years and has never had an 
> incident, then he "never really found a need for [a motorcycle 
> helmet]", and may as well do without.

To say nothing of those who have had accidents without wearing helmets 
and came through in one piece...  :-}

BTW, as I have stated before, I do not put ABS in the same category as 
a good helmet. you could be T-boned by a car and your ABS would not 
help in the least, the helmet may just save your life.


04 Yamaha FZ6

Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Who knows? Who cares?