Winsor Crosby wrote:
> It seems to me that the fallacy is that people can be 100% attentive
> and in control all of the time. A mode of transportation that depends
> on that state of consciousness is doomed to hurt people. I like
> motorcycles too and have even considered getting one again, but at
> least a car gives a little margin for error. Pushing your fender in
> six inches is the not the same as pushing your head in six inches.
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
No, no! You're right, of course.
I was just pointing out that the closer you can get to the ideal, which is
that 100% attentiveness, the better your chances to avoid that nasty accident.
When I was a young operator, with my new .48 Harley springer, I was palling
around with a number of "Old timers" (must have been 24 or 25...) who
constantly told me, "Soon you'll begin to think you can ride that sucka
anywhere and everywhere, and you'll feel SOoo good about your skills and
ability with that bike.
When that happens, watch out. You're headed for a fall or a nasty accident.
You have to stay on top of it, mentally and physically, all the time. Try to
never let that attentiveness fail you."
Reminds me of the old U.S. Air Force saying, "There are old pilots, and there
are bold pilots...but there are very few old bold pilots..."
keith
> On Oct 10, 2006, at 8:38 AM, keith_w wrote:
>
>> But for the largest part, it could have been avoided if the
>> operator was fully
>> awake and 100% attentive and in control.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|