Sportbike Forums on WristTwisters banner

Check this chode out...

3K views 19 replies 18 participants last post by  jrj 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Sounds like Hugh Curran needs to get his head out of his ass
 
#7 ·
The comments in the article are worth reading that steaming pile of crap. Or I assume they would be, since I read the first line and then skipped to the comments, just to watch him get eviscerated by every single commenter (except that one that said he was handsome, sarcasm?)


Anyways, What a douche.
 
#10 ·
I really enjoyed this response to the author :)



"Dear Mr. Curran,

If you are truly interested in public safety, one would think you would be more focused on the leading cause of death in this country: Obesity.

Now Hugh, I've seen your photo, and lets face it, you're a fatty pants. Your cholesterol level is much more likely to end up costing the public money, than all motorcyclists combined. We are, you see, a very small minority in the US, whereas as you, and your doughnut loving friends, are bankrupting the healthcare system, simply because you don't have the discipline to pass up a Baskin Robins every once in a while.

Of course, that also explains your problem with motorcycles. It's hard to stuff a Whopper into your saggy jowls, while riding one.

The solution seems clear: It's time to ban fat people. Specifically, fat people with online degrees in "journalism", who write articles that are meant to create controversy, rather than be of any informative value.

But wait, that would infringe on your right to stuff your face behind the wheel, while not paying attention to the road, and that, of course, is what America is all about; the freedom from personal responsibility.

I'll cut this short. It's close to lunch time, and I know the KFC down the street from your little cubby hole, has an all you can eat deal this week.

Bon Appetite."
 
#13 ·
He fails to see the root cause of motorcycle fatalities, lack of proper training and safety gear. In 2008, illinois had around 230 fatalities of which like 75 percent were not wearing a helmet. The single leading injury that kills motorcyclists is head trauma. Also i think something close to 90% of motorcyclists are self taught or taught by a friend, therefore lacking the proper knowledge and skill set to effectively avoid a crash.

I will follow by saying that i am against manditory helmet laws, as we deserve the freedom of choice. However, if people were educated about the risks of riding and the rewards of wearing safety gear, fatalities would decrease. I am an advocate for mandatory training just like driver ed for a car license. I wrote my final paper for my english class on this exact subject if anyone wants a copy.
 
#15 ·
. I wrote my final paper for my english class on this exact subject if anyone wants a copy.
I'd love to have a copy.

I took a motorcycle safety course back in 06 when I first got my motorcycle license. This course is mandatory for any person under the age of 18 looking to acquire their motorcycle license which was the reason why I took the course only being 17 at the time. I found it very informative and helpful since i had only ridden a Yamaha "Big Wheel" 80 when i was younger.
 
#14 ·
Brilliant logic this taint sniffer bases his article on. By the same logic, we should ban cars, since more people at killed in car wrecks than plane crashes. :)
 
#18 ·
Good ol' statistics. Use what you want, ignore the rest, and call it incontrovertible proof. This writer, and many more, are saying to themselves: "Most people won't bother to check my 'facts' anyway, and the ones that do don't have a national media forum to present a refutation, so who cares if I'm dead wrong?", and a self serving idiot (my addition).

According to the HURT report, and backed up by the European MAIDS study, over 66% of fatal motorcycle accidents (69% in the MAIDS study) were directly caused by car drivers failing to see the motorcyclist. We're still dead, and there are rarely any substantial penalties for such inattention. It would seem that this is a more telling statistic than anything he quoted, and to address this and the actual motorcycle and car fatality numbers (4,008 vs 35,691 in 2004) and you could save considerably more lives with one simple act -- ban cars. The 35,000 and change lives saved will be slightly offset by increases in public transportation and common carrier deaths, but given the statistically greater safety of both of those compared to cars as many as 31,000 lives will be saved. On the motorcycle side of the equation things would improve as well, cutting fatalities by a whopping 2,700+ riders / passengers.

Of course we will always have the drunk undertrained inattentive overconfident riders killing themselves, and the innumerable ex car drivers who switch to motorcycles and off themselves as well, so the motorcycle stats would take an alarming turn starting some 6 months after the car ban is enacted. Two years later there will be a huge brouhaha about the numbers, but it will die away when the person doing the most shouting about "the disturbing statistics showing ... " dies in a bathtub fall (Those monsters should have been banned centuries ago!") and the voice is considerably quieted. Besides, nobody bothers to check the numbers anyway (this or any other time) so it all blows over.

Ignore him. All he's doing is trying to increase his flagging reader / viewer numbers with free ink and sensationalism. Any other action taken gives him what he wants. A fatter paycheck.

Oh, this guy is about as liberal as Dubya.

Rob
 
#19 ·
World is a small place.

I was just over at a friends house ranting passionately about something non motorcycle related, and his fiancee walked in and said "Are you talking about Hugh's article?"
It gave me pause for a second and I said "no, but there was an article I read recently written by a guy named Hugh and it's got a lot of bikers pissed off..." My friend laughed and said "You've read it? That's my friend, he is totally amazed at the coverage it's gotten"

So I had to ask if Hugh really believed what he wrote. First off his personal stance is pretty much anti-motorcyle, he is also written articles critical of cars too. I'm guessing his personal beleifs would not jive with most, but then again neither would mine. However, I'm told that his writing style exaggerates this greatly, and he is aware of it, but it's how he writes.
The article was originally intended as a straw man. It's purpose originally was to allow the paper to publish a rebuttal put forth and sponsored (and paid for I might add) by a local motorcycle dealer. And the author knew then when he was writing it. The paper has since decided to let the article stand alone though.

I'm told that the author has written a few editorials before, but nothing has gotten any attention. It seems that this is just something he does for fun, like a hobby. Right now he's enjoying his 15 minutes of fame, and I imagine that time may be spent sitting within his locked house pretending that nobody is home :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top