The Leader Post reported today that insuring our bikes will cost more in 2007. On average the rate hike will be about $75 more per year. SGI's actuaries recommended an increase of 96.1%, but the actual raise will be approximately 9% for cruisers and 15% for sport bikes.

Obviously, as motorcycle riders our first reaction is . But after careful consideration, we should be generally relieved that the numbers aren't higher. Saskatchewan is still the cheapest place in the country to insure vehicles, and SGI actually does lose a lot of money on motorcycle claims. So we can't complain too much. . . can we?<br><br>Post edited by: Atlas, at: 2007/03/15 15:07

I say it's time for Graduated Licensing! It should have been brought in 5 years ago.

gsxrwolf wrote:

QUOTE:
I say it's time for Graduated Licensing! It should have been brought in 5 years ago.

I agree, I'm sick of hearing about newbie riders going out and buying a race bike with a headlight and killing themselves. At minimum, a safety course should be made mandatory before a rider can ever hit the street.

SGI should also put a time limit on how long a learners is good for. There are riders out there that ride their whole lives on a learner's...

QUOTE:
Kevin wrote:

SGI should also put a time limit on how long a learners is good for. There are riders out there that ride their whole lives on a learner's...

Tell me why you say this?

The full licence is only a piece of paper that says they took the road test.

At least the learners keeps them close to home, keeps them off the streets at night and limits them to only injuring themselves (if they crash) and all this if they obey the law.

Yes it can be said that anyone with only a learners hasn't proven that they can ride, but I would bet that most accidents are due to being cutoff or some other wrong doing by a vehicle, not the fault of the biker.

The biker just pays the price every time!

Frozen, you pretty much answered your own question. Of course a license is just a piece of paper, but it represents the biker's knowlege and education of operating a motorcycle. We must adhere to a standard of operational ability, otherwise there will be far more accidents, fatalities, etc, etc, as more and more people start riding. I'm not saying that we should limit the amount of people who ride, but I acknowlege the fact that not everyone can handle riding a motorcycle.

I also agree that we need a tiered license system. Right now, a 16 year old can obtain a learners license, and legally ride a Hayabusa. This is simply not right. Again, I'm not in any way advocating limitation; the 16 year old should be allowed to ride a Hayabusa, but only after he's proven to the rest of us that he's not a danger to himself or others while doing so. And you can only learn how to ride big bikes through experience.

Finally, Frozen, yes, most accidents are caused by other drivers, but it is the responsiblity of the biker to ride defensively and anticpate what the cage drivers will do. The trick is to avoid dangerous situations in the first place (i.e. not riding in driver's blind spots.) These techniques are not instinctual and must be learned, preferably from a professional. Most often, it is the &quot;fault&quot; of the cage driver, but fault doesn't really mean much when you're dead.

Atlas said it quite well here, but I'll add in my two cents as well...

I think there should be a time limit put on a learners permit because a learner's permit (especially a M learners) is one of the easiest tests in the world to get. In no way, shape or form does reading a handbook and answering some multiple choice questions enable or prepare a person to jump on a bike.

If a person was given a year from the time they write that simple test to get there M endorsement, that would give them more than enough time to actually ride a motorcycle and gain the experience necessary to prove to someone else that they can ride.

Giving them an open ended term to have their learner's means that they will never actually have to prove to anyone that they can ride. They just answer some multiple choice questions and hit the road.

Yes, they have limitations while riding on a learner's permit (BTW - doesn't permit generally imply a limited time anyhow?) but most people only ride within 100 kms of their hometown anyhow and I don't think the current learner restrictions mean that that rider is less likely to cause an accident or be a danger to themselves and others. Although, they can't have a passenger so that eliminates the possibility of injuring a passenger I suppose.

This all goes hand in hand with the changes that need to be made to the motorcycle licensing guildlines in general - some of which Atlas mentioned. I think a mandatory safety course should be implemented and once a rider gets their learners, they should not be able to ever ride on a public road until they have a sucessfully passed a safety course. Not only that, but the instructors of these courses should be able to recommend to SGI that they should have their license pulled if they show themselves to be a danger.

I think that it's insane to think that just because someone flips through a handbook, writes a 20 minute multiple choice exam (a person goes into a multiple choice exam and is already sitting at 25% even if they just guess at all the answers!), buys a bike that can easily kill them (and others) and is ready to head out onto public roadways - many times without ever straddling a bike in their life before.

Many people do ok in the system as it currently sits. Some people are just naturally responsible and mature enough to take it easy and ride many years without incident - but we've all known riders - both young and old - that are a menace to themselves and others and should not be on the road and this current system does nothing to get those people off the road.

As far as your comment about motorcycle accidents rarely being the riders fault - that is pure myth. I was invited to a SGI roundtable a couple weeks back and they stated that well over 65% of all motorcycle accidents are the fault of the rider.

Don't get me wrong here guys...I don't disagree with some of your comments, but I also think we need to make it easy for newbies to join the sport otherwise our numbers deminish as do dealers and so on.

We see the same thing happening in the firearm community right now.

I would much rather encourage that 16 year old and his friends to get a bike licence and participate in the fun, rather than make or vote on laws in the future that will limit the rest of us in some way.

Just as I will always take a kid hunting or fishing.

Don't beat me up on this it is just my $0.02 worth!

And Hey: Buy a spare helmet at a garage sale this summer and invite the neighbours kid to sit on the billet seat for a ride this summer!

Hey...I know it may have seemed we were jumping on your comment a bit, but I know myself - it's something I'm just a wee bit passionate about and can ramble on and on and on...

Anyhow, sorry if it sounded like I was trying to beat ya up...

I agree that it is important that newb's enter the sport but at the same time - I would like to keep them in the game longer too! The rules as they sit take alot of lives very early on in people's riding &quot;career&quot;.

There is definitely a balance to be struck. Discussions such as this one are important in defining what the majority think is fair and will help the community as a whole and not hinder it.

I have 5 kids...2 of them are already riding. I'm doing my part...haha

Kevin wrote:

QUOTE:
I have 5 kids...2 of them are already riding. I'm doing my part...haha :P

5 Kids huh!!

Sound to me like you are doing too much RIDING! and not enough time on the bike!

HEY!!!!

My wife rides too!