Motorcycles, Guns, and Nerves

As I've lived these forty-some years, it's my pleasure to have been introduced both to guns and motorcycles at a very early age. And it has been my curious fascination to observe the nervous reactions, even raw fear, of people unfamiliar with each.

At least a thousand times in my life I have seen the wide-eyed reaction of someone when I've described the methods involved in leading a skeet target, or breaking down a semi-auto handgun for cleaning, or recounting the thrill I experienced when my father presente dme with my first firearm at the tender age of nine.

And at least a thousand more times in my life I have seen the wide-eyed reaction of someone when I've read off the list of motorcycles I've owned, places I've ridden, races I've competed in. And also when I recount for them how I earned enough money for half of my first mini-bike (parents paid the other half) at the age of ten.

There are those people in my life who know of both halves - the firearms and the motorcycles. I'm not sure if they think of me as some wild-eyed neanderthal with a Type A personality or if they think I was merely the unfortunate child of careless parents. But neither of those is true.

All I am is a self-reliant American, and one that was fortunate enough to have parents who were not chicken-littles. My father taught me about firearm safety long before I had a firearm. He taught me how to hold the gun, to aim it, to fire it, to clean it, to store it, and to anticipate what might go wrong. I learned these things in the full confidence and calm environment of a man who had my best interests in heart. A firearm is to be respected mightily, but need not be feared.

So too, a motorcycle or a snowmobile. When the lessons are taught young, by a caring and experienced parent, the environment is not wrought with fear, but with respect for the vehicle and its capabilities. I've never felt that a motorcycle was something I was "hanging on to" within an inch of my life. It is a vehicle that I control and do not fear, because I learned it while young.

Life is not about fear. It is about learning and mastering. Do not fear that which you do not know. Find a mentor, learn the object or the discipline under their tutelage, and then use it with reverance and respect. Never mind the fearful looks of those who do not understand.

New Hampshire Government Wonks and Tachometers

So from the fine state of New Hampshire comes yet another installment of what happens when government gets in the business of mandating vehicular equipment.

New Hampshire is presently considering a law that would require all motorcycles to be equipped with tachometers. The tach issue is a tag-along on HB-95 intended to address motorcycle noise levels. The Bill specifies certain decibel levels at certain RPM's, so how do you know if you're complying without a tach?

I can understand the desire to tame down some of the noise. Some of the big V-Twin boys like their scoots a little too loud, even for my enthusiast's ears. But, as I see it, how do you write a legitimate law governing noise that pertains to only one type of vehicle? If the lawmakers mandate that a motorcycle may not emit more than 95dB of sound, then how do you philosphically justify not including any other vehicle in that law?

Why do lawmakers care at what RPM the motorcycle is too loud? Does it matter thatit splits your ear drum at idle vesus 10,000 rpm? It's silly.

What about the thousands of motorcycles already in use in New Hampshire that were not designed to have tachometers on them in the first place? Do you require the motorcycle owner to retroactively fit the bike with an electronics package that will "drive" a tach? Those kits are not cheap, and for some bikes, they simply don't exist.

This is what happens when government thinks it can get smart when writing law. This is why government needs to stay out of micro-managing vehicular design and equipment. The NH lawmakers have every right to mandate a noise level, but they are simply not qualified to tell motorcycle riders and manufacturers how to achieve it.

Motorcycle Controls, and Barack Obama

Probably 98% of the world's production motorcycles now have the standard controls layout: right hand throttle/front brake, left hand clutch, right foot rear brake, left foot shifter. This layout, as you probably know, only became standardized in the past 20 years. Indeed, some will remember the suicide shift arrangements of the vintage Harleys, Indians, etc. Throughout the first century of motorcyle evolution, riders and engineers alike learned about how the human rider "works". The end result was achieved through a willingness to evaluate and learn human physiology and the interface with a motorcycle.

What we have today are motorcycles with relatively "standard" controls and ergonomics. The huge upside to this, of course, is that any experienced rider can get on just about any production motorcycle and ride it without having to literally "learn" it from the ground up. This enhances safety of course, but even enhances the thrill of riding for those who like to go fast.

So what happens, then, if someone comes along whose physiological or mental makeup does not lend itself to the standardized controls? What if the logic employed by that person is carried over from the experiences of driving a car? It would follow that they would want to change the throttle/brake(s) to the right foot, clutch to the left foot, shifter to the right hand and the left hand would have nothing to do, control-wise. Experienced riders know that this would be dangerous. The layout of one type of vehicle does not necessarily lend itself to that of another type. As stated before, the controls on a modern production motorcycle are where there are because of trial and error. The motorcycle is what it is because of deliberate design.

So along come Barack Obama, gets elected President of the United States. Does he acknowledge the "design" of the country as laid out in the Constitution? No. It does not fit his paradigm. So, he has set about fundamentally restructuring it, ignoring the built-in safeguards and restrictions our founding fathers placed there as a result of trial and error. He has forgotten that his duty as president is to act as a steward, as a "rider" if you will, of the country, and roll it down the highway of destiny within the constitutional guardrails. Instead, he is remaking the country in the image he sees fit, having no experience at such "engineering" previously.

This re-engineering will have the same disastrous results as the aforementioned motorcycle with car-oriented controls. I hope the ditch is not too hard....

Makeup and Pinstripes

Makeup on a woman is like pinstriping on a motorcycle: It should be used only to highlight the natural lines. It should not be used to attempt to alter the basic appearance. Women, like motorcycles, are either attractive or they are not, and that is largely in the eye of the beholder. Makeup and pinstriping will not alter fundamental attractiveness, but serve merely to draw the eye to a specific point.

Motorcycles, toys, medicine, and the government.

Just goes to show what happens when you get the government involved in micro-managing peoples' lives. In a move meant to protect children from lead-tainted toys from China, out illustrious government inadvertently outlawed the sale and even the REPAIR of all mini-bikes and atvs designed for young riders. How so?

It is a manufacturing necessity to add lead to certain metals found on mini-bikes and atv's. It's been done for years. And all the years I've had the pleasure of watching kids learn to ride in those tender ages, I never saw one try to gnaw on a carburetor.

To his credit, Malcom Smith, famed motorcycle racer and prolific motorcycle dealer in SoCal, has defiantly challenged the ban. He will win. Malcom never loses.

To those who want the government taking over health care to make it affordable.... what the HELL are you thinking?