parents

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

<snip>

> To be fair they can't be completely accurate all the time, being human
> and all.

And, also to be fair, "completely accurate" is a kind of movable feast
dependent of the world view or prejudices of the reader/listener.

regards,
CrazyCam
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

bikerbetty wrote:

> or a 7 year-old boy, probably a little tearaway who's been
> endlessly egging Dad on to take him for a Christmas spin?

Sigh. Whilst I was at the MotoGP my two grandsons convinced my wife that
letting them out of the gate to ride along the verge was an excellent idea
and it would shut them up for a while. Quad and children (13 and 9) finished
upside down in a ditch. No serious injuries and hopefully a lesson learnt
(also by Grandma I hope).

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

CrazyCam wrote:

> I have bad news for you, betty, we aren't starting to accept, it has
> always been so.

Yup.

> The stories about celebs, wars and major disasters aren't any more
> likely to be true and accurate than any other story.

Surely the celeb stories are gospel truth?

> WMD's? Children thrown overboard? Shane Warne's mobile phone?

I believed the Warnie phone stories, they were lies too?

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 08:17:23 +0900
Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.TakeThisOut@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
> Sigh. Whilst I was at the MotoGP my two grandsons convinced my wife that
> letting them out of the gate to ride along the verge was an excellent idea
> and it would shut them up for a while. Quad and children (13 and 9) finished
> upside down in a ditch. No serious injuries and hopefully a lesson learnt
> (also by Grandma I hope).

Lesson they learn is "hey, we know what to avoid now!"

People never get upset when kids fall off horses, but do when they
fall off motorbikes, why is that?

I did silly things on my pushy as a kid like riding down stairs and
off home made jumps long before the BMX craze. Helmetless and in
shorts and t shirt and bare feet.

Thing is.. some kids *did* get hurt doing that. But lots didn't. But
many people now seem to think that getting hurt's inevitable.

I fell off horses a lot when young. Mostly because I was jumping them
or galloping over rough ground, or riding young horses that spooked.
Or just because I didn't pay attention. Started riding a 4 years old,
fell off for the first time shortly thereafter

But a riding instructor will tell you to get right back on that horse
and pay attention. A parent or policeman will presumably say "oh
dear! it is too dangerous!"

Which is why you should send your kid to a hardnosed riding instructor
and not teach them yourself

Zebee
- whose first instructor had been taught by a cavalry sargeant and it
showed!
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

"bikerbetty" <bikerbetty.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:47729b26$0$4471$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> Not good enough. If accuracy is sacrificed in the race to be first with
> the news, then there's something very wrong.
>
> I mean, come on.... "yeah, half of what we wrote was bullshit - but we got
> the news OUT THERE to the world, and that's what counts." I don't think
> so! Hello? If it's fiction, it ain't news!
>

Betty, having a lot of experence with the media, it is my view that they are
not interested in truth at all, just a sensational spin on selective facts.
Journilists see themselves as being above us all and having the right to
filter and edit at will. Generally it is best to avoid them at all times.

Boxer
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Yeebers wrote:
> In that one instance it was not safe otherwise Dad wouldn't have
> gotten hurt. Whether there's ever going to be an instance where doing
> that is safe or not, I am not going to say but I have doubts.

Dad got hurt because he wasn't wearing a helmet? What were motorcyclists
doing before 1960? All those riders without helmets, and all those cars
without seat-belts, it's a wonder that generation survived to spawn us.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> Lesson they learn is "hey, we know what to avoid now!"

They had already learned "Don't ask when granddad is around". Granddad
doesn't care that they ride on the block, outside the gate on the roadway he
does.

> People never get upset when kids fall off horses, but do when they
> fall off motorbikes, why is that?

Because it is always the horse's fault?

> I did silly things on my pushy as a kid like riding down stairs and
> off home made jumps long before the BMX craze. Helmetless and in
> shorts and t shirt and bare feet.
>
> Thing is.. some kids *did* get hurt doing that. But lots didn't. But
> many people now seem to think that getting hurt's inevitable.

I was riding a two-wheeler when I was four (before trainer-wheels were
invented) and brakes were an optional extra for rich kids when I was a
teenager. As bicycle helmets had also not yet been invented, all my mates
and I died.

> I fell off horses a lot when young. Mostly because I was jumping them
> or galloping over rough ground, or riding young horses that spooked.
> Or just because I didn't pay attention. Started riding a 4 years old,
> fell off for the first time shortly thereafter

Been there, done that.

> But a riding instructor will tell you to get right back on that horse
> and pay attention. A parent or policeman will presumably say "oh
> dear! it is too dangerous!"

My parents never said that. It was assumed that all the boys would get
motorcycles when they got old enough.

My daughter got her m/c licence and she and her younger brother did the
bungee jumping and jumping out of funcional aircraft thing. All three scuba
dive.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 09:29:03 +0900
Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.DeleteThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> Yeebers wrote:
>> In that one instance it was not safe otherwise Dad wouldn't have
>> gotten hurt. Whether there's ever going to be an instance where doing
>> that is safe or not, I am not going to say but I have doubts.
>
> Dad got hurt because he wasn't wearing a helmet? What were motorcyclists
> doing before 1960? All those riders without helmets, and all those cars
> without seat-belts, it's a wonder that generation survived to spawn us.
>

sorry to break it to you Theo, but lots of them did get killed.

If you ride wearing a helmet, you will survive some crashes uninjured or less
injured than if you were not.

You will survive some smaller number of crashes (much smaller, how
much isn't clear at all) not wearing a helmet that would injure you if
you were wearing one.


There are a number of crashes where wearing one won't help. There are
a number where wearing one will make no difference.

The guy who got hurt might have been less injured if he'd been wearing
a helmet. We don't know that, although I suspect it is likely given
that the speeds were not going to be high.

Zebee
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Pratchett's good. Mildly insane .. but good.

Oook ! Said the librarian.

bikerbetty wrote:
> "CrazyCam" <crazycam.DeleteThis@upturnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4772c893$0$12542$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>> May I commend to you the reading of Terry Pratchett's novel "The Truth",
>> as a remarkably accurate account of news gathering.
>>
>> regards,
>> CrazyCam
>
> Why do I have the feeling it will destroy all my youthful illusions????
>
> betty
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.TakeThisOut@bekkers.com.au> wrote:

>> Dad got hurt because he wasn't wearing a helmet? What were
>> motorcyclists doing before 1960? All those riders without helmets,
>> and all those cars without seat-belts, it's a wonder that generation
>> survived to spawn us.

> sorry to break it to you Theo, but lots of them did get killed.

Some, certainly; lots, as in a large percentage of riders, certainly not.

> If you ride wearing a helmet, you will survive some crashes uninjured
> or less injured than if you were not.

I think I already knew that. It's just that some people think that all
people without helmets and/or seatbelts cannot possibly get home alive.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:37:11 +0900
Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.RemoveThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.RemoveThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
>>> Dad got hurt because he wasn't wearing a helmet? What were
>>> motorcyclists doing before 1960? All those riders without helmets,
>>> and all those cars without seat-belts, it's a wonder that generation
>>> survived to spawn us.
>
>> sorry to break it to you Theo, but lots of them did get killed.
>
> Some, certainly; lots, as in a large percentage of riders, certainly not.

Dunno... Of all crashes, no. Of all crashes where a helmet might
make a difference, that's harder to say, but Harry Hurt seems to think
yes.

>> If you ride wearing a helmet, you will survive some crashes uninjured
>> or less injured than if you were not.
>
> I think I already knew that. It's just that some people think that all
> people without helmets and/or seatbelts cannot possibly get home alive.

Absolutely. Just as some think that without a fullface you will be
horribly disfigured, or without leathers you will lose all your skin.

Some people have really interesting risk compensation issues I think.
Such as after someone did a bunch of wheelying stunts, stuffed one up,
and got his face badly broken when a whole bike landed on it, his
mates all howled that the Oz standard for helmets was defective
because it didn't test chinbars and obviously the chinbar was
inadequate...

Zebee
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

> Some people have really interesting risk compensation issues I think.
> Such as after someone did a bunch of wheelying stunts, stuffed one up,
> and got his face badly broken when a whole bike landed on it, his
> mates all howled that the Oz standard for helmets was defective
> because it didn't test chinbars and obviously the chinbar was
> inadequate...

Yup. Safety equipment allows people to be more stupid, but terminal
stupidity is, well.. terminal.

I think that safety equipment that makes you uncomfortable, particularly for
long periods, is unsafe.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: parents 

Theo Bekkers wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> Theo Bekkers <tbekkers.DeleteThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
>>> Dad got hurt because he wasn't wearing a helmet? What were
>>> motorcyclists doing before 1960? All those riders without helmets,
>>> and all those cars without seat-belts, it's a wonder that generation
>>> survived to spawn us.
>
>> sorry to break it to you Theo, but lots of them did get killed.
>
> Some, certainly; lots, as in a large percentage of riders, certainly not.
>
>> If you ride wearing a helmet, you will survive some crashes uninjured
>> or less injured than if you were not.
>
> I think I already knew that. It's just that some people think that all
> people without helmets and/or seatbelts cannot possibly get home alive.
>
> Theo
>
>
Helmets can and will kill you
I lost a mate through a broken neck in a drop , looked alseep but wasn't

I remember one arvo we finsihed work and the wog bloke ( a greek) took

off out the gate straight into the side of an old Austin denting it (1972)

hugly, all he had was a head ache and the car had massive damage where

he head butted it .

Helmets might save as well I guess but I only ever

fell once wearing one and it was a nice open face ( on a sprotster)

s o I wasn't going that fast .
 >> Stay informed about: parents