MADD MAKE A POSITIVE IMPACT
22 October 2006 - Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers

Richard Quigley, American Biker Folk Hero to Cell Phones and Biker Safety

Two-wheeled friends:

Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers has done a lot this past year, that is, a lot of good, and on the road to making a positive impact toward greater safety for motorcyclists, and in part that is reflected in the number of original articles, from providing a Counter-Agenda to the NTSB ''Motorcycle Safety'' Agenda, which was played out on Bruce & Ray''s Biker Forum at LDR Long Distance Rider, to our short biography of ''Richard Quigley, American Biker Folk Hero'' in which it is explained how he obtained the right to ride free in Santa Cruz California and is now working on obtaining the right for all California bikers to ride free of the state helmet law.

Just to provide you one initial example of what we consider to be an important article, we have fully researched the issue of cell phone use while driving, reviewing all the epidemiological literature, all of the controlled experimental studies as well as the converging neurological studies and the studies demonstrating the now epidemic nature of this problem. In addition, we have suggested why this is an issue particularly important for motorcyclist safety, only in part because motorcyclists are so much more vulnerable in the accidents caused by those who drive under the influence of cell phones. We also suggest that this is an important independent variable which NHTSA is not taking into consideration in its analyses of motorcycle death statistics and post helmet-law repeal statistics.

You are invited to review our scientific review article at: http://motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com/cell-phones-and-dui-drunk-driving.html I will discuss it very briefly below as I think that it is a worthy contribution to our understanding of the problem particularly from the biker''s perspective, which is a unique perspective on the issue.

But first, to give you another example of the new articles on the site, just so you can see how varied our contributions to biker politics have ranged, I would love it if you would take a moment to review our most recent article in our series on ''American Biker Folk Hero Richard Quigley.'' It is located at http://motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com/bikers-rights-17.html I wrote it with the intent to inform the biker community accurately of Quig''s work in obtaining the first court ruling that the California helmet law was unconstitutional as enforced, and his continuing efforts to obtain a ruling from the court ordering the CHP and all related law enforcement agencies to cease and desist all further enforcement of the helmet law. It also discusses his work in Oregon and Nevada. But because I wanted the article to be read, and read widely, I felt that it also had to be readable, not just a bunch of legalese. I had many e-mail communications with Quig over an extended period of time, I read his briefs, his supporting documents, the CHP internal memoranda, and his tape recordings of his interrogation of the police who gave him helmet citations. I had lengthy telephone conversations with him in which we discussed his impressions of the legal bases for his constitutional arguments which were most effective in obtaining his ruling. And I went up to Santa Cruz and spent a wonderful time with Quig, getting to know him personally, learning of his other political adventures, including his valiant efforts to curtail police harassment, riding with him as he patrolled Santa Cruz with his two tape recorders in search of police abuse. Indeed, I came to know him as an American Biker Folk Hero. The product is an inspirational biographical article, beginning when Quig runs away from home at age 6, with his dog and his gun, a 22 rifle, making it 300 miles from Morenci Arizona to Silver City, New Mexico, but also interweaving the legalese, so that it can be better digested in the context of Quig''s life story.

I won''t say more than that, merely urge you to take a moment to read the article.

I am pleased to provide my permission for other sites to republish these or any others of the articles on the site with credit to the author and Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers and a link, either to the page on which the article appears or to the main page at: http://www.motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com The reason is that there are follow-up articles that appear are indexed on the side of each page, and on the main page of the site, and which continue to be added. For example, with the Richard Quigley article cited above, it is just one in a series, due to be supplemented with additional information with regard to the injunction and his Nevada project in particular. With regard to the cell phone article, for another example, there is already up one article discussing the importance of that research in countering NHTSA misinterpretations of rises in motorcyclist death rates over time, as they fail to consider the increased incidence of cell phone induced accidents which have been rising exponentially over the past 5 years with the epidemic increase in the use of cell phones while driving. This is an independent variable which NHTSA fails to account for in its death statistics and its interpretation of post-helmet law repeal studies. So different bikers may see different things of interest in these articles and may wish to consider the secondary articles which may answer more directly the secondary issues that concern them most.

Returning to the scientific review article. After reviewing the scientific literature, I feel confident, and strongly, that the epidemic use of cell phones while driving is the biggest threat to bikers riding on the streets today. Unfortunately, there is a lot of conventional misinformation, for example that the DUI driving impairment and four fold increased incidence of accidents results from the ''handling'' of the cell phone. This is complicated by bad political decisions to regulate only handheld cell phones, giving the impression that hands-free cell phone use while driving is ''safe.'' This is a tragedy, and the only way to overcome the misinformation and most importantly this largely unappreciated danger to bikers is through competent discussion of the scientific literature.

Just in a few words, driving under the influence of a cell phone results in DUI level driving impairment and a four fold increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident. The fact is established by the replicated epidemiological literature and by the controlled experimental studies. It doesn''t matter whether the driver uses and handheld or hands-free cell phone. This is demonstrated in the epidemiological literature and confirmed and explained by the controlled experimental literature and converging neurological literature. The impairment does not result from holding the phone but from the conversation itself. It results from the shifting of limited conscious attention to the internal-cognitive tasks associated with the give and take of the cell conversation away from the external-visual tasks essential for safe driving. The scientists refer to this as an inattentional blindness; when the auto driver''s attention is shifted to the internal cognitive he doesn''t see what is right in front of him, he doesn''t see changes in the driving environment which would be expected to automatically attract the driver''s attention; he will not see even what his eyes are fixed upon. This is confirmed by the neurological studies out of Johns Hopkins which used fMRI studies to track the subjects attention while on the cell phone, demonstrating the shifting of activity from the visual centers of the brain to the auditory centers of the brain.

This is not an insignificant issue for motorcyclists, nor is it an issue which has common ramifications for all motorists. First, cell phone use while driving has slowly crept up on us over the past 5 years, but it is now epidemic. In the year 2000 only 2 percent of auto drivers on our American highways were actively involved in cell conversations at any given moment in time. By December 2005 the number has risen to 10 percent. That means that when we ride our bikes out of our garages onto the streets, one in every ten of the cars we encounter is now being driven by DUI level impaired car driver, 4 times more likely to cause an accident. That is a huge danger. In terms of the danger it poses, it is no less than 1 in 10 drivers operating their vehicles DUI drunk.

I say that this is a motorcyclist issue in part because we are much more vulnerable to the auto driver who is driving under the influence of his cell phone. Auto drivers, with their metal cages, interior padding, seat belts and air bags usually walk away from these accidents unscathed. Motorcyclists do not. We are rendered quadriplegic, paraplegic, we suffer catastrophic orthopedic injuries and limb amputations, we can''t return to our jobs and support our families. Furthermore, there is a contributory effect in motorcycle accidents, more common because of a distinct auto driver inattentional blindness, resulting from other factors such as ''expectation'' and ''relevance'' which accounted historically for the disproportionate incidence of intersection motorcycle accidents in particular, where the auto drivers would commonly say they didn''t ''see'' the oncoming motorcyclist.

As discussed in subsidiary articles, this explains why auto driver death rates have remained essentially the same while motorcyclist death rates have risen over the past 16 years, as NHTSA is so fond of complaining, blaming it on the biker. These studies NHTSA touts are population studies complicated by the host of independent variables, some of which have been pointed out by ABATE and others, such as the increases in new motorcycle registrations over time. The epidemic rise in cell phone accidents is another potent independent variable. Auto driver death rates have not risen over the past 16 years notwithstanding the increased incidence of accidents due to cell phone usage because of the independent variable that advances in auto safety engineering, e.g., air bags, and greater compliance with the safety engineering e.g., seat belts, have resulted in offsetting the increased number of accidents when measured only in terms of auto driver death rates. By contrast the increase in motorcyclist death rates has gone up, we believe, as a function of the more dangerous riding environment characterized in large part by the huge numbers of auto drivers operating their vehicles under the influence of cell phones. Motorcyclists, however, have not so benefited by these types of auto safety advances, and so our increased incidence of motorcycle deaths is not offset. This is the problem with NHTSA''s reliance on gross population studies. But one cannot get away from the facts that 10 percent of all auto drivers at any given moment in time are driving DUI impaired with a 4 fold increased likelihood of causing an accident. So there can be no doubt that this is a potent independent variable which is not being considered in NHTSA''s interpretation of the population studies.

So these are a few of reasons why I feel that these articles are important to bikers in particular, even more so than for the general public.

These subsidiary articles are referred to and linked on the sides of the pages of the main articles, and on the main page of the Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers web site. Again to provide some insight into the range of secondary articles, we provide an article by a thoughtful libertarian explaining why on libertarian principles he supports a ban on cell phone use while driving.

And it is why we request that when articles are republished that a link be provided to the page on which the article appears or to the main page of the web site.

Some of these articles are by necessity quite lengthy. This is true, for example, for the cell phone scientific review article because we feel that it is important to cite to the scientific literature to permit others to read it and form their own conclusions, and because we feel that it is important that we discuss the scientific literature in some detail so that it can be understood that these are not just our interpretations of the data but the interpretations of the original investigators, in the context of their methodology and results obtained. With regard to the cell phone article in particular, what some biker web sites have done is to republish the abstract and Introduction sections, which is acceptable to me, again so long as a link be provided so that the reader can obtain the full article, with the complete discussion and access to the subsidiary articles.

We hope in this manner to ''raise the consciousness'' of bikers about the broader and more potent motorcycle safety and bikers rights issues we face. Our main emphasis is motorcyclist safety, but we also explain on other subsidiary pages why we feel that our motorcycle safety offensive compliments the bikers rights movement.

Thank you for your consideration in the above regard.

And, RIDE SAFE, my friends, and keep an eye out for the cell phone impaired driver, because one thing you can be sure of is the he won''t keep an eye out for you.

''M-A-D-D Ray'' Henke
Motorcyclists-Against-Dumb-Drivers
Co-Moderator, Bruce & Ray''s Biker Forum, LDR Long Distance Rider

www.motorcyclists-against-dumb-drivers.com

More News
  For October 2006
  From Motorcyclists Against Dumb Drivers
  For Safety
  Biker247.com Home Page