What NOT to do whilst leaned over in a corner . . .

[russell_bynum]

The correct response in mid corner to suddenly seeing a LEO, is to wave but maintain your throttle and line.

 

Yup. I've done that dozens of times and never had any issues.

 

Just make sure you wave with all five fingers...

 

lol. Good point.

[Deek]

"Failure to maintain control"

"Excessive speed for conditions"

 

They have a ton of bullshit, catch-all phrases for such situations.

 

What, you don't think he "fell" due to his own poor skills? He deserves a citation I think, although I'll give him points for ATGATT.

[Deek]

If the leo in question was really more interested in creating safer conditions at that turn rather than writing tickets, he'd have parked the cruiser so it could be seen before entering the turn.

 

He was.............but for the other lane.

[Deek]

"....A couple of other dept managers took advantage of my day off to hide and, sure enough, one of the kids took a pair of cuff links......"

 

CUFFLINKS? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[motoguy128]

I don't think he was going too hot into the corner. I think he tried to apply the front brake... or trail brake too aggressively when he saw the LEO. It looked like he lost the front end first. Technique makes a difference here as well. He's probably has a few bad habits like aggressive trail-braking and he's a bigger guy, so he might need stiffer front springs or more front pre-load. Transfering too much weight ot the front end can overload the front contact patch.

[eddd]

"....A couple of other dept managers took advantage of my day off to hide and, sure enough, one of the kids took a pair of cuff links......"

 

CUFFLINKS? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

I thought the same thing...

 

Someone was really dating themselves with that one. I, of course, read about these things called cuff links in my history book.

[John Ranalletta]

"....A couple of other dept managers took advantage of my day off to hide and, sure enough, one of the kids took a pair of cuff links......"

 

CUFFLINKS? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

I thought the same thing...

 

Someone was really dating themselves with that one. I, of course, read about these things called cuff links in my history book.

It happened in 1969. Cuff links were the rage...with JC Penney customers, anyway. BTW, you can still buy a pair...of cuff links, that is.

[Heck]

California has a law called the "basic speed law". This law has nothing to do with the speed limit. It simply says you cannot drive faster than what is safe.

 

 

Guess they didn't trade that basic speed law for radar equipment eh?

Always figured in the interest of fairness to the motoring public.. "One or the other but not both...."

 

Gravel, diesel and oil spilled in a turn would also constitute speed too fast for conditions if you go down.

 

Sounds like one of those "catch all" laws that keep our court systems clogged up.....

Don't disagree about the road hazard argument, but at some point you have to realize that there are such things as accidents....Adding insult to injury just adds to the coffers......

 

"Flame on" .............

 

 

 

[MotorinLA]

Sounds like one of those "catch all" laws that keep our court systems clogged up.....

Don't disagree about the road hazard argument, but at some point you have to realize that there are such things as accidents....Adding insult to injury just adds to the coffers......

 

"Flame on" ............

 

Actually, a few years back the terminology used by many/most departments was changed from “traffic accident” to “traffic collision”, as traffic accident suggests that nobody is responsible for the collision. In most cases one (or more) of the parties involved did in fact cause the collision, generally by committing some kind of traffic infraction.

 

This is why the Traffic Index works. The Traffic Index shows an inverse relationship between citations and collisions. Increase the number of citation and you decrease the number of collisions. I know, crazy stuff, giving tickets actually increases traffic safety.

 

For all you doubters out there, take a basic behavior modification psychology class at your local college. Pay attention in the lecture that covers negative reinforcement, especially on a variable reinforcement schedule, and you’ll find that changing behavior through giving tickets is actually based on a tried and true psychology principle. The variable schedule for negative reinforcement also explains why we like to “hide” and pop out and give you a “nice surprise”… when we keep you guessing the effect lasts longer. :smirk:

 

[Paul Mihalka]

A bit of hijack: Behavior modification, yes - but not always what you might expect. In my area neighborhood there many nice country roads, mostly between farms. Some of them have some nice straights. Most are marked at 30 mph. Some times LEOs like to sit on these roads. One day about three years ago I got two speeding tickets on the same ride, from the same cop, but in two different locations! I was pissed! So, for a few days I experimented to ride not under, but close to the speed limits. When cars started to pass me on the double yellow I knew that won't work. So I bought a good inexpensive radar detector. A Escort 8500 refurbished, for $150. I found that I guess LEOs don't expect radar detectors on these roads, so most of the time the radar is switched on solid. Early warning. Several saves, no more tickets.

[TinyTrains]

No one should be surprised to see a CHP car parked in that spot. That stretch of road in Malibu is know as the Snake. Just north of the Rock Store. It is a fun bit of road, but Saturday and Sunday it is famous for out of control squids. Several crashes a day, which is why it was being videoed. The CHP parks a cruiser there quite often, and may have motor units patrolling too.

 

Just type "snake and crash" into YouTube and you will find endless footage of corners gone bad.

 

Just another day in California.

[upflying]

A bit of hijack: Behavior modification, yes - but not always what you might expect. In my area neighborhood there many nice country roads, mostly between farms. Some of them have some nice straights. Most are marked at 30 mph. Some times LEOs like to sit on these roads. One day about three years ago I got two speeding tickets on the same ride, from the same cop, but in two different locations! I was pissed! So, for a few days I experimented to ride not under, but close to the speed limits. When cars started to pass me on the double yellow I knew that won't work. So I bought a good inexpensive radar detector. A Escort 8500 refurbished, for $150. I found that I guess LEOs don't expect radar detectors on these roads, so most of the time the radar is switched on solid. Early warning. Several saves, no more tickets.

I have no problem with detectors. Just keep in mind that a properly trained officer using instant-on radar and LIDAR probaly can and will obtain your speed before you can react with a brake application after your detector pings. I've stopped countless speeders with a detector proudly planted on the dash. In those casees, the detector simply announces you are about to be cited.

There are situations where a detectors can give you early warning. Non-instant on with novice officers continuously painting all lanes of traffic is an example. In those circumstances, the detector is a good investment.

[MotorinLA]

A bit of hijack: Behavior modification, yes - but not always what you might expect. In my area neighborhood there many nice country roads, mostly between farms. Some of them have some nice straights. Most are marked at 30 mph. Some times LEOs like to sit on these roads. One day about three years ago I got two speeding tickets on the same ride, from the same cop, but in two different locations! I was pissed! So, for a few days I experimented to ride not under, but close to the speed limits. When cars started to pass me on the double yellow I knew that won't work. So I bought a good inexpensive radar detector. A Escort 8500 refurbished, for $150. I found that I guess LEOs don't expect radar detectors on these roads, so most of the time the radar is switched on solid. Early warning. Several saves, no more tickets.

 

Not to burst your bubble, but more and more agencies, including CHP, are now favoring LIDAR for speed enforcement. No continuous operation and target specific use. As stated by Bob, you may catch the lazy/novice users on your detector, but don't rely on it too much, as a skilled operator will pick you off like a ripe piece of fruit at harvest time... :smile:

[Paul Mihalka]

You guys are not really telling me anything new. That is why I did not have a detector from the late 80's to a couple of years ago. In principle instant-on made detectors obsolete. I have the detector now because of the radar usage within a circle of about 50 miles around my home. Around here the combination of lazy LEOs (bless them ) and a detector works.

Out on real highways I stay more or less in tolerated/forgivable speed range and I did not get a ticket for years.

[ESokoloff]

...... Just north of the Rock Store. ........

1st off, welcome

I believe this is South/West of the Rock Store.

The rider is South bound & the next turn is the 180* just before the overlook.

Everything else you stated is completely accurate

[TinyTrains]

...... Just north of the Rock Store. ........

1st off, welcome

I believe this is South/West of the Rock Store.

The rider is South bound & the next turn is the 180* just before the overlook.

Everything else you stated is completely accurate

 

Thanks for the welcome.

 

I just looked at the map and you are correct. I forgot the coastline runs east-west there, not north-south. I like riding the Snake, but I am always afraid of being taken out by some out of control idiot.

 

Scott

2009 R1200R

[Deek]

"...I, of course, read about these things called cuff links in my history book...."

 

Yep, there are getting hard to find, even on a cruise ship, which is about the only time I wear cuff links anymore (with my tuxedo of course!).....I'm retired from work but addicted to cruising, among other pursuits!

[Deek]

"...It happened in 1969. Cuff links were the rage...with JC Penney customers, anyway. BTW, you can still buy a pair...of cuff links, that is."

 

Ah, those were the old days!

[Deek]

"....A Escort 8500 refurbished, for $150. I found that I guess LEOs don't expect radar detectors on these roads, so most of the time the radar is switched on solid. Early warning. Several saves, no more tickets....."

 

Heh heh, don't try that where I was a police officer! Having a radar detector was a 99% guarantee of getting cited for speeding if you were pulled over for speeding. But this was in a city, not the country, and the county guys probably did things differently. Radar detectors work pretty well today, but not 100%, and most seasoned officers can judge speed pretty accurately......a quick zap with the gun is confirmation, but not always a requirement to receiving a cite.

[drzep]

For all you doubters out there, take a basic behavior modification psychology class at your local college. Pay attention in the lecture that covers negative reinforcement, especially on a variable reinforcement schedule, and you’ll find that changing behavior through giving tickets is actually based on a tried and true psychology principle.

 

Ah ha. The behaviorists also failed to realize that there is a brain between both ears. No lectures on cognitive theory for you guys?

[MotorinLA]

For all you doubters out there, take a basic behavior modification psychology class at your local college. Pay attention in the lecture that covers negative reinforcement, especially on a variable reinforcement schedule, and you’ll find that changing behavior through giving tickets is actually based on a tried and true psychology principle.

 

Ah ha. The behaviorists also failed to realize that there is a brain between both ears. No lectures on cognitive theory for you guys?

 

Cognitive and Developmental Theory ala Piaget and Erikson, etc... been there, done that. Still doesn't disprove theories by B.F. Skinner and other behaviorist, it simply shows that there is more to it than simple Behaviorism. By the way, observational psychology has many short-coming, thus the development of the field of psychobiology.

 

MotorinLA

B.S. in Psychobiology

UCLA

[Skywagon]

But wait...we forgot to look for the positive. Did you see how fast the rider was able to get up? Watch it all the way to the end as it goes into slow motion. He may not ride well, but the recovery was way cool! And look how fast the LEO arrived at the scene. Drove that 25 feet in no time.

[drzep]

... there is more to it than simple Behaviorism. By the way, observational psychology has many short-coming, thus the development of the field of psychobiology.

 

MotorinLA

B.S. in Psychobiology

UCLA

 

Im not arguing here on the merits of the various factions that grew out of the behaviorist movement, nor suggesting that the early and simplistic functions used to describe simple behavior are without validity - no, by no means. Still useful in very limited applications. My only point is that learning theory has (intelligently) incorporated many cognitive principals into their framework so that we no longer approach a patient as a box of S-R. People bring years of life experience to the table that CANNOT be accounted for in simple reinforcement protocols.

 

Also, I am certainly aware of the shortcomings afforded by observational work and myself was fortune enough to be trained early on in psychobiology.

 

[shameless credential plug]

 

UPenn: BS - Experimental Psychology; BS - Physiology; MS - Biopsychology

UConn: PhD - Neurophysiology; MD - boarded in Neurology+Psychiatry

 

So yes, I can appreciate your approach.

 

[/shameless credential plug]

[MotorinLA]

... there is more to it than simple Behaviorism. By the way, observational psychology has many short-coming, thus the development of the field of psychobiology.

 

MotorinLA

B.S. in Psychobiology

UCLA

 

Im not arguing here on the merits of the various factions that grew out of the behaviorist movement, nor suggesting that the early and simplistic functions used to describe simple behavior are without validity - no, by no means. Still useful in very limited applications. My only point is that learning theory has (intelligently) incorporated many cognitive principals into their framework so that we no longer approach a patient as a box of S-R. People bring years of life experience to the table that CANNOT be accounted for in simple reinforcement protocols.

 

Also, I am certainly aware of the shortcomings afforded by observational work and myself was fortune enough to be trained early on in psychobiology.

 

[shameless credential plug]

 

UPenn: BS - Experimental Psychology; BS - Physiology; MS - Biopsychology

UConn: PhD - Neurophysiology; MD - boarded in Neurology+Psychiatry

 

So yes, I can appreciate your approach.

 

[/shameless credential plug]

 

I'll just take my BS (University issued and otherwise ) and go home now... :smile:

[Agent_Orange]

[drzep]

MotorinLA

B.S. in Psychobiology

UCLA

Hey!!! You started it. lol

 

Edit: actually had a couple to many last night and broke my personal agreement to stay away from the computer and/or credit cards. Sorry for being a tool box there...

[MotorinLA]

MotorinLA

B.S. in Psychobiology

UCLA

Hey!!! You started it. lol

 

Edit: actually had a couple to many last night and broke my personal agreement to stay away from the computer and/or credit cards. Sorry for being a tool box there...

 

No worries, I had it coming...

[chrisd]

UConn: PhD - Neurophysiology; MD - boarded in Neurology+Psychiatry [/shameless credential plug]

 

Yeah, OK, but UConn???

 

(Brother of a St. John's alum)

[Boxtop]

OK, I'm late to this thread and surprised at some of the posts questioning whether a ticket is warranted.

 

If you happened to be riding the other way and crashed head-on into this clown as he was crossing the double yellow into your lane, how would you feel about the ticket then?

 

The out of control squiddly riding has no place on a public road.

[drzep]

I agree (sort of) that a ticket is warranted because he lost control of his bike. We don't know if he was over the speed limit (in that particular turn; video prior to that turn shows him clearly driving too fast). What is clear to me is that his crash was as much the result of that LOEs placement as it was that riders skill level. I know they want to "pick us off like ripe fruit" and such, but this is like entrapment for a novice rider.

 

We all know what an inexperienced cyclist is going to do in a situation like this; and we all expect him to squeeze the brake, drop the throttle and then low-side. I don't necessarily know where the blame resides and I'm not 100% comfortable putting it ALL on the cyclist. I know this wont be popular around here, but that is a lame position for a LEO to be in if he has any understanding of how most motorcycle operators ride. Park at the front of a corner, not its apex.

 

Flamesuit on.

[drzep]

Brother of a St. John's alum

 

Is St. John's a private high school or something?

 

 

[ESokoloff]

........ but that is a lame position for a LEO to be in if he has any understanding of how most motorcycle operators ride. Park at the front of a corner, not its apex.

 

Flamesuit on.

 

Just for clarity on THIS particular incident:

If this took place where I think it did...

(1) Limited off-road parking opportunity for the CHP

(2) This occurred just past the overlook (CHP is heading South in the North bound lane) & that WOULD be the at the front of the riders next corner (which happens to be 180*).

[chrisd]

Brother of a St. John's alum

 

Is St. John's a private high school or something?

 

 

Sure, make fun of our basketball team. I would expect more from an MD, but then again....

[drzep]

Just joking around chris. They will have a strong team again at some point. It's the natural ebbs and flows of all teams that are not Duke, Kansas and Kentucky.

[chrisd]

Just joking around chris. They will have a strong team again at some point. It's the natural ebbs and flows of all teams that are not Duke, Kansas and Kentucky.

 

UConn basketball ebbs and flows. St. John's kind of flat lines. But this is all in fun, Joe.

[MotorinLA]

I agree (sort of) that a ticket is warranted because he lost control of his bike. We don't know if he was over the speed limit (in that particular turn; video prior to that turn shows him clearly driving too fast). What is clear to me is that his crash was as much the result of that LOEs placement as it was that riders skill level. I know they want to "pick us off like ripe fruit" and such, but this is like entrapment for a novice rider.

 

We all know what an inexperienced cyclist is going to do in a situation like this; and we all expect him to squeeze the brake, drop the throttle and then low-side. I don't necessarily know where the blame resides and I'm not 100% comfortable putting it ALL on the cyclist. I know this wont be popular around here, but that is a lame position for a LEO to be in if he has any understanding of how most motorcycle operators ride. Park at the front of a corner, not its apex.

 

Flamesuit on.

 

IMO I see a problem with your theory Doc. In this case the rider went down because he over-reacted to the LEO. However, I think you could have seen the exact same outcome if there had been some other perceived hazard present, rather than the LEO. What if there had been an animal in the road, or there had been another rider coming down the hill that surprised and spooked this guy? I think you’d have seen a very similar situation. So, as much as you’d like to shift some of the blame over on the LEO, I think the bottom line is that the rider operated his motorcycle beyond his skills. This is why I believe some of the other posters here feel that he earned a ticket.

 

The bad LEO argument just doesn’t hold water.

 

[R Shortley]

The "basic speed law" is a relic of the days of no speed limits on the open highway. Aging myself here, but I can remember when Iowa passed its first speed law for the open road---70 mph, 60 at night. The basic speed law was the only law enforcement tool in an attempt to enforce some level of safe speed on "the motoring public." When the highway speed limits came in, the basic speed law was left in place to be able to give the message to some idiot rear ending a station wagon full of kids on a foggy morning "I'm late" drive to work, and othe such situations. I suspect that every state and Washington, D.C. and the territories have some form of the basic speed law, maybe the same wording all around given uniform traffic codes.

 

For my money, this scene would be a perfect application of the basic speed law. It is one of the few laws left that relies on the proper exercise of an officer's discretion in assessing the unsafe conduct leading to a crash. And, if anyone deserves a ticket it is a rider who is riding over his/her head, unable to meet the mental and physical demands of an unexpected situation. Better to give a safety message to a live person than a trip to the transplant unit, then the morgue to a brain-dead, still-breathing corpse.

[drzep]

IMO I see a problem with your theory Doc. In this case the rider went down because he over-reacted to the LEO. However, I think you could have seen the exact same outcome if there had been some other perceived hazard present, rather than the LEO. What if there had been an animal in the road, or there had been another rider coming down the hill that surprised and spooked this guy? I think you’d have seen a very similar situation. So, as much as you’d like to shift some of the blame over on the LEO, I think the bottom line is that the rider operated his motorcycle beyond his skills. This is why I believe some of the other posters here feel that he earned a ticket.

 

The bad LEO argument just doesn’t hold water.

It's not a 'bad LEO' argument nor a theory, just an opinion.

 

Despite all of the other road hazards that could have triggered this guy to overreact (as you cited above), why should another one be added to the mix? I don't see how you can deny that, irrespective of his ability or lack thereof, having a LEO at the apex of the corner maximized his chance of overreacting and falling. Sure, it could have been a possum, a deer, turtle, pothole, oil, yadda, yadda, but it wasn't. It was a human that consciously chose to be positioned right there.

 

I'm not placing all of the blame on the LEO; I'm really not. I agree this guy was out of his range of ability. I'm also not saying that he should not be cited; riding beyond ability, give him a ticket. What I am saying is that a LEO parked right there is, well a little lame by my judgement. But I'm not a LEO so its more difficult for me to rationalize it. I'm sure there is a good reason.

 

Also pretty sure that we will never agree on this. C'est la vie.

 

[MotorinLA]

IMO I see a problem with your theory Doc. In this case the rider went down because he over-reacted to the LEO. However, I think you could have seen the exact same outcome if there had been some other perceived hazard present, rather than the LEO. What if there had been an animal in the road, or there had been another rider coming down the hill that surprised and spooked this guy? I think you’d have seen a very similar situation. So, as much as you’d like to shift some of the blame over on the LEO, I think the bottom line is that the rider operated his motorcycle beyond his skills. This is why I believe some of the other posters here feel that he earned a ticket.

 

The bad LEO argument just doesn’t hold water.

It's not a 'bad LEO' argument nor a theory, just an opinion.

 

Despite all of the other road hazards that could have triggered this guy to overreact (as you cited above), why should another one be added to the mix? I don't see how you can deny that, irrespective of his ability or lack thereof, having a LEO at the apex of the corner maximized his chance of overreacting and falling. Sure, it could have been a possum, a deer, turtle, pothole, oil, yadda, yadda, but it wasn't. It was a human that consciously chose to be positioned right there.

 

I'm not placing all of the blame on the LEO; I'm really not. I agree this guy was out of his range of ability. I'm also not saying that he should not be cited; riding beyond ability, give him a ticket. What I am saying is that a LEO parked right there is, well a little lame by my judgement. But I'm not a LEO so its more difficult for me to rationalize it. I'm sure there is a good reason.

 

Also pretty sure that we will never agree on this. C'est la vie.

 

"Lame" I can live with, that the LEO caused the collision not so much :smile:.

 

BTW I've long ago given up on winning any arguments on this board .