How do u feel about this??

[SpeedDemon]

Originally Posted by setasai

Haha I wasnt mocking you with the GTA thing. I meant to say how absurdly insane to hear a story like this since it is something that intentionally do exactly in the game and ideally no where else.

Lol yeah my girlfriend was scared to get onto the back on my bike for the first time after watching me play that game and i had to convince her i could drive well in the game befor she would trust me in real life lol...now she doesnt want to get off so i kinda kick myself after that one

[n4mwd]

Here is a photo of the biker cop, his sister and mother from his facebook page.



Still think he's a dumb biker that deserved what he got?

[nickjpass]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

Here is a photo of the biker cop, his sister and mother from his facebook page.



Still think he's a dumb biker that deserved what he got?

Uhh...that picture proves nothing. I can be in a picture with my family, that doesn't mean I don't argue with them.

Just because he took a picture with them means nothing.

My cousin is a high school drop out who has a long criminal record than they can keep track of. He was in the family photos as well, dressed nicely and smiling.

[LoD575]

I feel that it's very unfortunate but something that could have been avoided.
I am saddened by the loss of a fellow LEO but he should have known the possible outcome.

I have worked several fatal motorcycle crashes during my time in Law Enforcement and most of the time it was rider being stupid.

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

Uhh...that picture proves nothing. I can be in a picture with my family, that doesn't mean I don't argue with them.

Just because he took a picture with them means nothing.

My cousin is a high school drop out who has a long criminal record than they can keep track of. He was in the family photos as well, dressed nicely and smiling.

The point was to put a face with the statistic. This guy was a cop with a family - not some guy that was asking for it. Of course, it doesn't matter that he was a cop, not many bikers ask to get killed in wrecks.

As far as the wreck itself, I am still trying to figure out how it happened. According to reports, it was a straight road, the biker's were going one way and the dump truck was coming the other. But the biker impacted the rear of the dump struck.

So the only way I can figure on that happening is for one of them to do a sudden U-turn. If the bikers did the U-turn, they would have to do it after passing the truck and would have to slow down to the point where the accident would never have happened.

So that leaves the truck making an abrupt U-turn. So I go back to my original statement that the truck caused the wreck.

As far as the excessive speed, its really starting to look like the two bikers were racing. And the winner may have been the loser.

[SpeedDemon]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

Here is a photo of the biker cop, his sister and mother from his facebook page.



Still think he's a dumb biker that deserved what he got?

YUPP, anyone doing 115kph over the speed limit is willing to throw it all away. Yeah maybe he didnt think it was going to crash but he did and now look what happend. From driving on these roads everyday for about the past 2 years i have NEVER seen a dump truck even try and make a U turn across 4 lanes of traffic it is highly unlikly that was the case. I will be interested to se how much attention this gets now due to the fact it was a cop who was killed
Im not saying good thing he died at all and i dont wish this upon anybody, Its always sad to see another biker become a statistic but in this case you kinda get what you deserve

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by SpeedDemon

...From driving on these roads everyday for about the past 2 years i have NEVER seen a dump truck even try and make a U turn across 4 lanes of traffic it is highly unlikly that was the case.

I doubt it is very common which is why the biker was caught by surprise. Other than a U-turn, I haven't got a clue how the biker could rear end the truck when they were headed in opposite directions. One news report did say that the truck made an unusual turn.

[Jinx250]

While I don't agree that the rider "deserved" to die, I do not have any sympathy for him, just for the family he leaves behind. Learning that the guy was a LEO makes it all the more surprising.

Originally Posted by Trailerboy531

What techniques do you recommend practicing? Breaking and downshifting at the same time? Just yanking in the clutch and holding it in while you break?

In a panic/emergency braking situation your focus should be on braking, not down shifting or even pulling in the clutch. You can always downshift after you stop. If you collide with something, it won't matter a whole lot that you didn't get down to first gear before stopping.

Originally Posted by n4mwd

As far as the gear, it doesn't sound like it would have made any difference.

This is something that people misunderstand about ATGATT. A lot of riders think that because they have gear on that they're safe. When in actuality, the gear only provides protection to a point. You could be in a full set of leathers and have a top of the line helmet. Great protection in a low side or slide. But if you hit a wall at 60MPH, well, you aren't wearing an airbag....

[SpeedDemon]

Im not saying he "deserved to die". I said he got what he deserved. If you are willing to risk your life by excessive speeding than you need to be willing to bear consequences and these are death...As far as the gear goes like Bob said gear doesnt make u invincible, the way i look at gear is its a second set of skin basically its not body armor

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by Jinx250

This is something that people misunderstand about ATGATT. A lot of riders think that because they have gear on that they're safe. When in actuality, the gear only provides protection to a point. You could be in a full set of leathers and have a top of the line helmet. Great protection in a low side or slide. But if you hit a wall at 60MPH, well, you aren't wearing an airbag....

Air bags for bikers. << Click Here.

I wonder if they work in the real world.

[Linuss]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

But you are blaming the biker without knowing all the facts. Why was he going that fast? Perhaps he had some kind of emergency that we don't know about. Isn't it kinda unusual for a speed freak to ride a gixxer?

Unless he was being chased by sharks with friggin lazer beams on their heads, he had no excuse to be speeding. Period.



Sorry, civilians are too stupid to be trusted to drive in a self-perceived "emergency". They lack skill when all road conditions are NORMAL, let alone hopped up on adrenaline.

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by Linuss

Unless he was being chased by sharks with friggin lazer beams on their heads, he had no excuse to be speeding. Period.



Sorry, civilians are too stupid to be trusted to drive in a self-perceived "emergency". They lack skill when all road conditions are NORMAL, let alone hopped up on adrenaline.

You missed the part where it was said that the the dead biker was a cop.

[Linuss]

No, I didn't, as you gave an excuse to the "emergency" before you even knew he was a cop.

My point stands
A)Sharks with lazers is the only emergency that would be legit to speed from. (That'd scare the sh** out of me too!)

B) Civilians suck at driving normally, let alone in an emergency. Don't give them the excuse to drive in an 'emergency' (often times it's not)




There's a reason why people are arrested and ticketed for driving their POV like it's an emergency vehicle in a self-perceived emergency. No, your 4-way flashers do not give you right of way over other traffic. We see it all the time, and sometimes the rash decision catches up with the driver.

http://www.myfox8.com/news/wghp-stor...,3219467.story




If it's an emergency, call someone that is paid to deal with the emergency. Don't excuse their idiocy.

[kaiserz]

It's sad, I feel bad for the friends and family that's gonna be affected by such avoidable act, but as a rider we have to know the risks that we are taking when every time we hop on our motorcycles, I also think that if we value our lives that it's our responsibility to be educated on the proper use of gear and the risks if we do something stupid. is it worth it? is it worth it if i beat the light? should I ride today even though I'm not mentally feeling well? there's always risk, and as a rider ours are always very high.

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by Linuss

No, I didn't, as you gave an excuse to the "emergency" before you even knew he was a cop.

My point stands
A)Sharks with lazers is the only emergency that would be legit to speed from. (That'd scare the sh** out of me too!)

B) Civilians suck at driving normally, let alone in an emergency. Don't give them the excuse to drive in an 'emergency' (often times it's not)

There are numerous hypothetical emergencies that could have been - chasing a hit and run driver, etc. As it stands, its looking more like the cop was racing his buddy, but we don't know. Your ASSUMPTION is that he didn't have a valid emergency, but you don't know either.

In FL you can speed in a medical emergency if on the way to a hospital. You can also run red lights. But it does not mean that other drivers have to yield to you no matter how much you honk. So you basically have to treat red lights as a stop sign. Its risky, but sometimes waiting for EMT's to arrive is not an option.

In most cases it would be better to wait for EMT's, but not always. When I first moved where I live, the average EMT/Fire/Police response time was 2 hours. If someone had an emergency, they had a far better chance of surviving if they had someone drive them to the ER.

[Linuss]

There are numerous hypothetical emergencies that could have been - chasing a hit and run driver, etc. As it stands, its looking more like the cop was racing his buddy, but we don't know. Your ASSUMPTION is that he didn't have a valid emergency, but you don't know either.

You tried defending his actions for some hypothetical emergency, and I showed you how that was not a valid excuse for what was done.

Originally Posted by n4mwd

In FL you can speed in a medical emergency if on the way to a hospital. You can also run red lights. But it does not mean that other drivers have to yield to you no matter how much you honk. So you basically have to treat red lights as a stop sign.

Really? Mind pointing me to said laws? I highly doubt those exceptions exist.

You're not driving an emergency vehicle, you don't have experience driving in an emergency, you aren't allowed to drive in that manner, and hell, you probably don't even have a legit time-critical emergency to begin with.


Don't put other peoples lives at risk.

Its risky, but sometimes waiting for EMT's to arrive is not an option.

The VAST majority of the time in everywhere but the most rural of communities, it is better to wait for EMS. EMS is educated in emergency medicine, not you (generic you). EMS is used to dealing with emergencies... you are not. EMS can stabilize and treat the vast majority of true medical emergencies long before they even think about leaving your driveway. They aren't just a taxi... they're an emergency room / ICU on wheels.

Let them do their job, don't put other peoples lives at risk for your 'perceived' emergency.

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by Linuss

The VAST majority of the time in everywhere but the most rural of communities, it is better to wait for EMS. EMS is educated in emergency medicine, not you (generic you). EMS is used to dealing with emergencies... you are not. EMS can stabilize and treat the vast majority of true medical emergencies long before they even think about leaving your driveway. They aren't just a taxi... they're an emergency room / ICU on wheels.

Let them do their job, don't put other peoples lives at risk for your 'perceived' emergency.

I can save the forum a lot of time here by saying there is nothing you can say to change my mind about this. I will say that I would not want you for a riding partner because if there was an accident, I could be laying their bleeding to death while you wander around looking for a good signal on your cell phone so you can call 911. No thanks.

[Linuss]

Ask Mizono how he feels about having a Paramedic as his riding buddy... you know... so long as I'm not the one crashing.



Considering I have vastly more experience in that type of situation, I'd hope you'd appreciate that whatever decision I made would be the appropriate one at the time, no?

[Mizono]

Originally Posted by Linuss

Ask Mizono how he feels about having a Paramedic as his riding buddy... you know... so long as I'm not the one crashing.



Considering I have vastly more experience in that type of situation, I'd hope you'd appreciate that whatever decision I made would be the appropriate one at the time, no?

Wow so this is the post you were talking about earlier huh???


n4mwd Obviously your entitled to your own opinion. And nothing we say is going to change that. However I will say that Linuss does hold a point in that those in the EMS field have had training in not only the medical aspect but how to react in a emergency situation. I think youll agree that most people dont think or react as normal in a serious situation. EMS personel are trained to think clearly and objectively.

I would never turn down having Linuss as a riding partner due to not only being friends with him but cmon.....having a paramedic as a riding buddy is not a bad idea at all.

[rusninja]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

Uhh...that picture proves nothing. I can be in a picture with my family, that doesn't mean I don't argue with them.

Just because he took a picture with them means nothing.

My cousin is a high school drop out who has a long criminal record than they can keep track of. He was in the family photos as well, dressed nicely and smiling.

But this man was a leo so you know he wanted to try to change somethings unlike your cousin who is the person that would be get put in jail because of the things he did wrong. criminals get respected negative vs people who try to help the community.

[Linuss]

Originally Posted by Mizono

I would never turn down having Linuss as a riding partner due to not only being friends with him but cmon.....having a paramedic as a riding buddy is not a bad idea at all.

I see how it is.


Use me for my brains AND my looks, eh?

[rusninja]

^ hehe :P

[Mazakawi]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

I can save the forum a lot of time here by saying there is nothing you can say to change my mind about this. I will say that I would not want you for a riding partner because if there was an accident, I could be laying their bleeding to death while you wander around looking for a good signal on your cell phone so you can call 911. No thanks.

This doesn't make sense. If you're laying in the road bleeding to death you'd prefer to have your riding partner some how balance you on the back of their bike instead of having a trained EMT trying to save you while EMS is on the way?

How exactly do you propose for him to transport you to the hospital if you are out riding together?

FYI, you've got a much better chance laying still on the side of the road than being draped over a motorcycle like a bad piece of luggage while it speeds through turns dragging your forehead on the pavement.

Did the guy deserve it? No.
Did he have it coming for riding like a complete moron? Yes.

It doesn't matter if he was a cop, he was on a civilian motorcycle not a police bike. He was breaking the rules just like everybody else and got what he had coming to him for it. He took the chance and bit it.

If I am going 100mph down the freeway and slam into the back of another vehicle injuring myself I can't take and say well that guy changed lanes in front of me. I'd still be responsible for it.

We all have families and most of them love us quite a bit. I know that some of my family members do fear that something awful will happen to me while I'm riding. That is a chance that we take. Yes, we can go fast and maneuver more easily than a cage but that doesn't make it ok for us to ride how ever we feel and then take no irresponsibility with our actions catch up to us.

It sucks that this had to happen. No, he probably wouldn't have been any better off if he had been wearing gear. There is nothing anybody can do about it other than learn from his mistakes.

You've already contradicted yourself several times in this thread so I don't get why you keep arguing for this guy. Did you somehow know him?

[n4mwd]

No I didn't know him. No I don't have a love affair with LEOs.

My point is that the true cause of the accident is the dump truck and not the biker. We know for a fact from official reports that the truck made an unusual turn causing the biker to collide with the rear of it despite the fact that they were originally heading towards each other. I may be wrong, but the only thing I can think of that would do that is an illegal U-turn violating the biker's right of way.

What isn't an absolute fact is that the biker was speeding. We have the second possibly third hand statements that the OP got on the scene that it looked like the biker was speeding, but nothing official. If there was, I missed it.

There was also no evidence or facts stating the biker was DUI. If there was, that changes everything.

As far as a riding partner, I only ride with those I trust to have my back. Linus isn't one of them. Sorry. And no, I don't expect him to drape me over his saddlebags and drag me to the hospital. Someone else said that and not me. I would expect a riding partner to try to apply pressure to a bleeding wound and drag me from immediate danger such as a burning and dripping gas tank. His EMT skills are useless if he chooses not to use them because I'm not an "emergency".

[nickjpass]

It wasn't the dump trucks fault if the rider was going over the speed limit.

[rusninja]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

It wasn't the dump trucks fault if the rider was going over the speed limit.

unless he wanted to make a illegal uturn

[Alex]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

My point is that the true cause of the accident is the dump truck and not the biker. We know for a fact from official reports that the truck made an unusual turn causing the biker to collide with the rear of it despite the fact that they were originally heading towards each other. I may be wrong, but the only thing I can think of that would do that is an illegal U-turn violating the biker's right of way.

What isn't an absolute fact is that the biker was speeding. We have the second possibly third hand statements that the OP got on the scene that it looked like the biker was speeding, but nothing official. If there was, I missed it.

None of us in fact know any of this. It's distressing when the general public immediately assumes the biker is at fault for all accidents. This angers us motorcyclists. But it's just as silly for us to immediately assume that the other vehicle must be at fault instead. From the information provided in the news report, it sure seems like the motorcyclist bears a significant portion of the responsibility, and was going much faster than would ever be perceived as safe for those conditions, and had a poor control of his bike at those high speeds.

Regardless of whatever inaccuracies might be in the reports (as they always are), the end result is that the motorcyclist wasn't alert enough and in control enough to prevent a fatal accident. Some might believe that these things just happen and there's nothing that he could have done. I don't believe that.

[nickjpass]

Originally Posted by rusninja

unless he wanted to make a illegal uturn

No. If he wasn't speeding, I can image the rider could have swerved/braked.

[n4mwd]

The U-turn thing seemed kind of odd so I beat myself up trying to figure out how it could have happened. Here is what I came up with. Although the news report said that he rear ended the truck, based on the photographic evidence, I am taking that as an error and that they really meant to say that the biker hit the right side of the truck towards the rear. This makes a lot more sense than rear ending the truck.

Attached is an aerial view of the accident scene. Since I wasn't there, all I can do is speculate, but I think I am getting closer to what really happened with this new theory.

1) The truck was attempting to turn into the driveway that he is currently stopped in. He made a left hand turn into the biker's right of way which precipitated the collision with the biker.

2) Biker was doing 60 kph and wasn't speeding. Biker panics when big truck pulls in front of him and goes heavy on the rear brakes. Starts to fishtail. Panics again and then releases the rear brakes. High sides into the right rear tire of the truck with the full weight of the bike (at least 800# for a Harley) crushing him against the tire.

3) If the biker did go heavy on the rear brakes, it would account for a longer than normal skid pattern causing an erroneous calculation of speed.

4) The bike split into two after the initial impact. The main bike and biker's body were found at almost the exact point of impact. The front fork was found only 40' away. This supports the theory that the bike was horizontal at the point of impact as a portion of the bike had to have slid between the tires and under the truck.

5) Debris field: If this was a high speed impact, I would expect the debris field to be much more vast and the front fork to be much farther away. Yet in this crash, there is very little debris.

While I still don't think this was the biker's fault, it does appear that if he had better riding skills, the accident could have been avoided. The truck would have covered at most about 2 and a half lanes. The biker could have swerved to avoid the collision. Proper braking may also have been an option.

[nickjpass]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

The U-turn thing seemed kind of odd so I beat myself up trying to figure out how it could have happened. Here is what I came up with. Although the news report said that he rear ended the truck, based on the photographic evidence, I am taking that as an error and that they really meant to say that the biker hit the right side of the truck towards the rear. This makes a lot more sense than rear ending the truck.

Attached is an aerial view of the accident scene. Since I wasn't there, all I can do is speculate, but I think I am getting closer to what really happened with this new theory.

1) The truck was attempting to turn into the driveway that he is currently stopped in. He made a left hand turn into the biker's right of way which precipitated the collision with the biker.

2) Biker was doing 60 kph and wasn't speeding. Biker panics when big truck pulls in front of him and goes heavy on the rear brakes. Starts to fishtail. Panics again and then releases the rear brakes. High sides into the right rear tire of the truck with the full weight of the bike (at least 800# for a Harley) crushing him against the tire.

3) If the biker did go heavy on the rear brakes, it would account for a longer than normal skid pattern causing an erroneous calculation of speed.

4) The bike split into two after the initial impact. The main bike and biker's body were found at almost the exact point of impact. The front fork was found only 40' away. This supports the theory that the bike was horizontal at the point of impact as a portion of the bike had to have slid between the tires and under the truck.

5) Debris field: If this was a high speed impact, I would expect the debris field to be much more vast and the front fork to be much farther away. Yet in this crash, there is very little debris.

While I still don't think this was the biker's fault, it does appear that if he had better riding skills, the accident could have been avoided. The truck would have covered at most about 2 and a half lanes. The biker could have swerved to avoid the collision. Proper braking may also have been an option.

So if it could have been avoidable then that means it's the riders fault.

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

So if it could have been avoidable then that means it's the riders fault.

No, why would you think that? If the trucker had looked before making a left hand turn it would have been avoided. If it happened the way I have theorized, then its the trucker's fault for violating the biker's right of way.

[nickjpass]

I mean if the biker could have braked and swerved, and he didn't, wouldn't it be his fault?

[ally99]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

So if it could have been avoidable then that means it's the riders fault.

According to dictionary.com, fault is defined as:
fault [fawlt]  - noun
1. a defect or imperfection; flaw; failing: a fault in the brakes; a fault in one's character.
2.responsibility for failure or a wrongful act: It is my fault that we have not finished.
3. an error or mistake: a fault in addition.

Funny, as I was writing the below post, I began to question my own logic based on the definition above. So go ahead and tell me why I'm wrong in my thinking below. I may just believe you.

Saying the rider was "at fault" is incorrect. Saying the accident could have been prevented is correct. "At fault" means he was responsible for the accident. It doesn't sound like he was the direct cause, but it definitely sounds like his riding skills weren't developed enough to avert the accident. JMO.

The fundamental question is, is "fault" defined by doing something wrong that was the direct cause of the accident (ie: running a stop sign, for example...no question of 'fault' there)? Or is "fault" defined by reacting incorrectly to an obstacle that is your path (ie: if you get hit by someone running a stop sign, are you at fault for the accident or just at fault for not looking ahead far enough to see it?)

The point is, every single rider in history makes mistakes, and luckily most of us live through most of those riding mistakes. The guy died an awful, untimely death, and at fault or not, his family is going through hell.

[n4mwd]

I haven't got a clue what the laws say in Canada, but if the accident had occurred here in FL, the trucker should be charged for violating the right of way.

I have heard rumors about other states allegedly having laws that say that if a driver could do something to avoid an accident and didn't, then its his fault. I don't see a law like that being constitutional unless it was required to be proven that the second driver was trying to cause an accident through inaction.

[nickjpass]

Originally Posted by ally99

According to dictionary.com, fault is defined as:
fault [fawlt]  - noun
1. a defect or imperfection; flaw; failing: a fault in the brakes; a fault in one's character.
2.responsibility for failure or a wrongful act: It is my fault that we have not finished.
3. an error or mistake: a fault in addition.

Funny, as I was writing the below post, I began to question my own logic based on the definition above. So go ahead and tell me why I'm wrong in my thinking below. I may just believe you.

Saying the rider was "at fault" is incorrect. Saying the accident could have been prevented is correct. "At fault" means he was responsible for the accident. It doesn't sound like he was the direct cause, but it definitely sounds like his riding skills weren't developed enough to avert the accident. JMO.

The fundamental question is, is "fault" defined by doing something wrong that was the direct cause of the accident (ie: running a stop sign, for example...no question of 'fault' there)? Or is "fault" defined by reacting incorrectly to an obstacle that is your path (ie: if you get hit by someone running a stop sign, are you at fault for the accident or just at fault for not looking ahead far enough to see it?)

The point is, every single rider in history makes mistakes, and luckily most of us live through most of those riding mistakes. The guy died an awful, untimely death, and at fault or not, his family is going through hell.

Sorry, what I mean by "his fault" is that he could have avoided it. So he could have avoided death. Like someone else said, he probably panicked.

[Alex]

Fault is a loaded word, that is different than responsibility. It might certainly be another vehicle's fault that a crash occurs. But it's the rider's responsibility to do everything they can to get themselves home safely, regardless of outside factors that may be aligned against them.

[nickjpass]

Originally Posted by Alex

Fault is a loaded word, that is different than responsibility. It might certainly be another vehicle's fault that a crash occurs. But it's the rider's responsibility to do everything they can to get themselves home safely, regardless of outside factors that may be aligned against them.

That's what my brain is trying to say. I don't want to sound like I have a big ego, but I think I'm pretty smart. Though I can't get what I think down on paper. It never comes out how I want it to. But yes, I think it was his responsibility to avoid the accident.

[ally99]

Originally Posted by alex

fault is a loaded word, that is different than responsibility. It might certainly be another vehicle's fault that a crash occurs. But it's the rider's responsibility to do everything they can to get themselves home safely, regardless of outside factors that may be aligned against them.

+1,000!

[n4mwd]

Originally Posted by nickjpass

That's what my brain is trying to say. I don't want to sound like I have a big ego, but I think I'm pretty smart. Though I can't get what I think down on paper. It never comes out how I want it to. But yes, I think it was his responsibility to avoid the accident.

Its everyone's responsibility to TRY to avoid accidents. But trying and failing do not make it his fault.

One thing that we may be overlooking is that he was on a big clunky Harley that is far less agile than a Ninja. If he was on a Ninja, he may have avoided the accident entirely. But we can't go around saying that anybody who doesn't ride a Ninja is automatically at fault when they are in an accident.

Better skills improve your chances of avoiding an accident. Just like a helmet improves your chances of surviving an accident. But neither of those guarantee anything.

[Linuss]

Originally Posted by n4mwd

As far as a riding partner, I only ride with those I trust to have my back. Linus isn't one of them. Sorry. And no, I don't expect him to drape me over his saddlebags and drag me to the hospital. Someone else said that and not me. I would expect a riding partner to try to apply pressure to a bleeding wound and drag me from immediate danger such as a burning and dripping gas tank. His EMT skills are useless if he chooses not to use them because I'm not an "emergency".

The very fact that you think EMTs and Paramedics are the same is proof in itself that you haven't the slightest idea what I am capable of, let alone would do in such a situation. You'd think someone with years of medical education in emergency medicine, and alot of the same capabilities as a doctor in those situations, would know what to do in such situation. Apparently not...


Correct... if you aren't an "emergency", you bet your sweet butt I probably won't do anything like drag you across asphalt. Guess what, if you aren't hungry, I won't make you food either! Oh the horror!


Guess what I did after I crashed my motorcycle at 40mph? I sat there for a second, checked myself, and deemed no need for an ambulance. Look, I'm still alive, and still have all my appendages!