Here's what happens when you cut off a motorcycle

Bah, never trust the media.

majority of it is crap, embellished and generally not entirely truthful.

She must have a husband who is a biker, or it must have been a slow day for the wheels website, and the editor needed an article pronto.

.
 
So I gather you don't trust TV, blogs any newspaper or radio, eh? You live in a cave alone with your bike and a laptop to post on GTAM?
 
Bah, never trust the media.

majority of it is crap, embellished and generally not entirely truthful.

She must have a husband who is a biker, or it must have been a slow day for the wheels website, and the editor needed an article pronto.

.

If you read her columns, you'd see she's better than that. She writes about driving from a practical perspective and focuses on good driving habits without being preachy.
And what exactly in this particular column is full of crap, is embellished, or is not entirely truthful? She made a mistake, owned up to it and very publically apologised for it. Pretty classy move.
Certainly classier that throwing generic derogatory remarks at her.
 
If you read her columns, you'd see she's better than that. She writes about driving from a practical perspective and focuses on good driving habits without being preachy.

She has, however, occasionally raised the collective ire of motorcyclists by writing some pretty airheaded remarks about riders and motorcycles in general. Which is why this apology of hers is especially sweet.
 
So I gather you don't trust TV, blogs any newspaper or radio, eh? You live in a cave alone with your bike and a laptop to post on GTAM?

How do you corelate a lack of trust for articles within major media with living in a cave? More importantly, what major media influenced you to such a dolted reasoning?
 
Bah, never trust the media.

majority of it is crap, embellished and generally not entirely truthful.

She must have a husband who is a biker, or it must have been a slow day for the wheels website, and the editor needed an article pronto.

.

I am inclined to believe she is owning up to an honest mistake. Let's just take it and run with it. Have sent her a note of thanks and forwarded the article to my caging friends.
 
Last edited:
Hang on....

The motorcyclist was behind her in the lane to her left, she had her signal on in plenty of time to make a lane change, and then the motorcyclist "flashed by" her as she started the lane change?

Why the bloody hell wouldn't the motorcyclist just let her change lanes, as she was indicating she intended to do, instead of trying to hog the lane and tear by her before she could make the manouver?

If that's really how it happened then that is some pretty stupid riding if you ask me. It's the 403 in heavy traffic - that is time for survival mode, not asserting one's claim on the lane, or the right to travel much faster than surrounding traffic.

Listen, anyone that commutes in city traffic knows its not always possibile to stop and give lane to erratic and or otherwise unentitled cages wanting to merge. Nor would you want to. What's the guy supposed to stop dead in a moving lane to give way to somone that , by law, is supposed to be waiting? How do think traffic would flow if everyone did that? Your logic applies no differently to other cagers, assuming they dont want to be hit. Our traffic rules exist for a reason.

Its easy to say "gee, he should have done this or that" after a rider gets hit, but the fact for a rush hour commute in downtown torronto is that if you were to yield to every bully on the road you would not move. It took me about an hour twice this week to get from the west annex to East York - about 7 km, and I was almost taken out 3 times doing nothing but moving very slowly in a straight line for most of it. I doubt most people on this forum have to experience anything like that on a regular basis. And I'm next to certain that the ones that do are forced to drive aggressively from time to time, even if they would prefer not to. I agree, when its not busy and there happens to be an aggressive cager in your midst its best to drive defensively and give way, but its not always possible - all the more so in bumper to bumper congestion, where anyone and everyone is acting crazy just to get 5 feet further ahread. We have traffic laws for a reason. Im tried of people taking the emphasis off of the guilty in order to blame the victim. We have a set of laws which determine who is at fault very clearly. People that merge dangerously are in the wrong. They dont deserve a break, and if a rider gets hit because some idiot doesnt look before they direct their cage into them they deserve the focus - not a rider who gets hurt obeying the law.

Fact is there are many, on this forum and elsewhere, that see motorcycling as some sort of perfect process, and whenever some post hoc intepretation can be made about rider error that's all they focuss on, as if the cage doesnt even factor into the equation (just world phenomenon anyone?). Its nonsense, and there is a not an urban biker on this forum that doesnt make some sort of move on a daily basis that can't be abstractly criticized by people sitting behind computer screens. A guy almost gets his head chopped off by a kite string and sure enough there is some idiot stating that "he should have seen it". Its ludicrous.

Edit: Although, I'm just recalling that individual was not a forum member but a commenter on the star website. Suffice to say, the predjudice is there.
 
Last edited:
She has, however, occasionally raised the collective ire of motorcyclists by writing some pretty airheaded remarks about riders and motorcycles in general.
I must have missed those. What did she say? The only other bike related column I can remeber is a recent one about her trip as a passenger to a bike rally in New Liskeard.
 
Listen, anyone that commutes in city traffic knows its not always possibile to stop and give lane to erratic and or otherwise unentitled cages wanting to merge. Nor would you want to. What's the guy supposed to stop dead in a moving lane to give way to somone that , by law, is supposed to be waiting? How do think traffic would flow if everyone did that? Your logic applies no differently to other cagers, assuming they dont want to be hit. Our traffic rules exist for a reason.

Its easy to say "gee, he should have done this or that" after a rider gets hit, but the fact for a rush hour commute in downtown torronto is that if you were to yield to every bully on the road you would not move. It took me about an hour twice this week to get from the west annex to East York - about 7 km, and I was almost taken out 3 times doing nothing but moving very slowly in a straight line for most of it. I doubt most people on this forum have to experience anything like that on a regular basis. And I'm next to certain that the ones that do are forced to drive aggressively from time to time, even if they would prefer not to. I agree, when its not busy and there happens to be an aggressive cager in your midst its best to drive defensively and give way, but its not always possible - all the more so in bumper to bumper congestion, where anyone and everyone is acting crazy just to get 5 feet further ahread. We have traffic laws for a reason. Im tried of people taking the emphasis off of the guilty in order to blame the victim. We have a set of laws which determine who is at fault very clearly. People that merge dangerously are in the wrong. They dont deserve a break, and if a rider gets hit because some idiot doesnt look before they direct their cage into them they deserve the focus - not a rider who gets hurt obeying the law.

Fact is there are many, on this forum and elsewhere, that see motorcycling as some sort of perfect process, and whenever some post hoc intepretation can be made about rider error that's all they focuss on, as if the cage doesnt even factor into the equation (just world phenomenon anyone?). Its nonsense, and there is a not an urban biker on this forum that doesnt make some sort of move on a daily basis that can't be abstractly criticized by people sitting behind computer screens. A guy almost gets his head chopped off by a kite string and sure enough there is some idiot stating that "he should have seen it". Its ludicrous.

Edit: Although, I'm just recalling that individual was not a forum member but a commenter on the star website. Suffice to say, the predjudice is there.

It seems like maybe I ****** you off, which was not my intention.

My point is pretty simple. Motorcycles are inherently dangerous, and sometimes hard to see. If the standard we set for ourselves in operating them is merely obeying the rules of the road and expecting everyone else to do the same 100% of the time, we will eventually get creamed. We have to do better. We have to predict the mistakes of others. Some errors are easy to predict, others are more difficult. If the car ahead of you in the next lane is signalling the intention to move into your lane, that's a pretty easy one to predict.

Of course I don't know if the rider in this particular instance could have done anything different. Maybe he / she was so close by the time the blinker came on that the safest manouver really was to speed up through the gap and try to clear the space the car was soon to occupy. Maybe (probably) they did that to the extreme left of the lane, to leave as much room as possible, and that is the only reason that an accident was avoided. Or maybe they were just oblivous to the multiple dangers (moving much faster than adjacent traffic; car signalling intention to change lanes), and got a rude surprise, which shouldn't have been a surprise at all, thus leading to the anger and rude gestures.

Personally, when I predict another vehicle's dangerous move and protect myself against it, my reaction is to congratulate myself for managing the risks (which is my job as a rider), not anger at the person who made the error.

But no, I don't have a great deal of experience in heavy traffic such as on the 403 - I purposely avoid riding in such places whenever possible. Commuting daily on roads like that on a motorcycle strikes me as not a great choice, honestly. So, maybe you're right and if I had to deal with that kind of traffic on a regular basis I would be angry too, and willing to blame everyone but myself for every bad experience. But that would do diddly squat to make me safer.
 
Last edited:
Hah. Yeah sorry, no you didnt piss me off. I just generally resent what I see as a persistent tendency to take the emphasis of blame off of the guilty party and place it on the rider - despite the law, despite rampant inconsideration, dangerous driving, and the like. So that post was not personal. Its not like what your saying is wrong per se, I just think cagers should be blamed for their mistakes. I dont see the need to choose the position of rider responsibility over blame for the cager - which is a tendency I see alot on this forum. Riders are victims of bad drivers, and while you are correct that we need to be especially aware and see moves ten steps ahead, we also have a legal right not to be victimized by cagers who couldnt care less. We have a right to be able to enjoy the protection of traffic rules as much as we have a responsibilty to follow them. Traffic simply would not work if every car in a moving lane stopped to accomodate a merger, reckless or otherwise. The logic that its ok for motorcycles to do this but not everyone is not sound. We need to all play by the same rules, and those rules state the rider did nothing wrong. I'm not "blaming everyone but myself" I'm placing the blame where it belongs on the violator of the traffic rule. And if everyone obeyed the rules and looked where they were going we would all be safer. Complacency with bad drivers does nothing to keep us safer either. The public should be made aware of whats going on. Motorcycles arent hard to see, if you're looking at them.

But anyway, please dont take this as personal animosity. No offence intended to you at :)
 
Last edited:
I must have missed those. What did she say? The only other bike related column I can remeber is a recent one about her trip as a passenger to a bike rally in New Liskeard.

There was a flare up on another COTU based motorcycle forum a couple years back over some flippant comments she made about motorcyclists.
 
IIRC...didn't she attempt to take the Gearing Up coarse maybe a year or so ago? I remember her writing about it in WHEELS and she stated that she even failed. She admitted that riding a motorcycle isn't easy and not for the weary minded.
 
If you're going to ride faster than the general public, then you had better be ready for the "cut off". Cheers!
 
If you read her columns, you'd see she's better than that. She writes about driving from a practical perspective and focuses on good driving habits without being preachy.
And what exactly in this particular column is full of crap, is embellished, or is not entirely truthful? She made a mistake, owned up to it and very publically apologised for it. Pretty classy move.
Certainly classier that throwing generic derogatory remarks at her.

It's simply a namby pamby story to fill up a website or newspaper to attract readers. For all you know, it could all have been fabricated. Always be skeptical of the media. It is a business afterall.

At the end of the day, her column got noticed, traffic got driven to the website, newspapers got sold, emotions were triggered.

Thanks to all the emails you guys all sent, Lorraine just got a raise and a promotion from her boss.


.
 
Wonder how many cagers read the article and all they remember is her getting flipped off by a rider?

I had a cager lean out his window at a stop light and apologize to me for cutting me off (he did). While I appreciated the apology I'd rather he just have been paying attention. With a bit of luck maybe he will pay more attention but sadly I doubt it. Cutting off a rider isn't the same as cutting off another car. With a car you probably just get some twisted metal...

Ride safe and as others have said... You may be right... but no point in being dead right!
 
I'm siding with Yellowduck on this one... sure, the onus is on the cager to change lanes safely and all that but unless the rider has a death wish then the onus is also on him/her to realize when to ride defensively. Not only did she have her signal on, but there is also the REASON why she was moving over: to facilitate the merging traffic enter the roadway. If the rider wishes to ignore a turn signal, and ignore a stream of vehicles trying enter ... thus causing things to bottle up tremendously.. and fly along in his/her own lane at apparently a faster rate than other traffic, then good luck....
Sometimes [usually all times on a bike] its better to be 100% safe than to be 100% in the right.

PS: and no, I'm not a perfect rider...ive had my share of lapses in judgement but i try to keep them to when i have the road to myself...

lets get through the year without any more posts in the Fallen Rider section~
 
I sent her an email on behalf of us suggesting her next set of wheels be this:
mobile_kitchen_island_1.jpg

love it, But what if she killed him... ? Like she can say sorry all she wants but it wouldn't give his/her life back.... ?
 
An awful lot of motorcyclists zip out to the left without a second look too.
In their case they'd be dead wrong, but I've been able to slam on the brakes and let them so far.
Sure I could protect my right of way, but not at all costs.
 
Back
Top Bottom