• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

It's a CRASH, not an Accident!

ThinkFast said:
At the beginning of this thread I think I addressed the difference, in my view, between an accident and a crash, and why I find it helpful to think in terms of “crashing”, rather than “being in an accident.”
Click to expand...

What problem are you solving by trying to redefine the word accident? Every scenario you mentioned fits the definition of "accident," a word that doesn't distinguish fault.

BTW, I'm 100% on board with the idea that I must take responsibility for everything that occurs when I ride. As you point out, we can't afford to leave our fate up to anyone else.
 
tzrider said:
What problem are you solving by trying to redefine the word accident? Every scenario you mentioned fits the definition of "accident," a word that doesn't distinguish fault.

BTW, I'm 100% on board with the idea that I must take responsibility for everything that occurs when I ride. As you point out, we can't afford to leave our fate up to anyone else.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to redefine the word accident at all. That's the whole point!

I'm advocating for riders to change how they describe what happens when a rider (themselves or others) hit the ground. Describing the event as an "accident" can deflect responsibility away from the rider (e.g., "Sam was in an accident." "I was in an accident.") Describing that event as a "crash" requires assigning to the rider responsbility for what happened (e.g., "Sam crashed." "I crashed.").

My hypothesis (which has some science supporting it) is that if we change how we think, it will change how we ride. It's all about mindset and attitude.
 
Last edited:
Focus less on the words describing the event and more on the actions leading up to the event.

Years ago we created the Crash Analysis Forum for exactly this reason.
 
ThinkFast said:
I'm not trying to redefine the word accident at all. That's the whole point!

I'm advocating for riders to change how they describe what happens when a rider (themselves or others) hit the ground. Describing the event as an "accident" can deflect responsibility away from the rider (e.g., "Sam was in an accident." "I was in an accident.") Describing that event as a "crash" requires assigning to the rider responsbility for what happened (e.g., "Sam crashed." "I crashed.").

My hypothesis (which has some science supporting it) is that if we change how we think, it will change how we ride. It's all about mindset and attitude.
Click to expand...

If you think using the word accident deflects blame, that really is redefining the word. We can accomplish what you are trying to without avoiding the word. If I had a lane splitting collision with a car that changed lanes, I could describe it a couple of ways:

"I had an accident because a car changed lanes in front of me."

"I had an accident because I let my attention get stuck on a car next to me when a car ahead changed lanes."

The first blames the car, while the second gets to what the rider could have done differently.

I hear the same sort of thing frequently when riders use the word crash. I actually don't recall hearing a rider referring to a backroad crash as an accident. It's usually like this:

"I crashed because there was gravel in the corner."

The above blames the gravel, like it just appeared out of nowhere. Taking responsibility for the crash might sound more like, "I crashed in gravel because I wasn't looking far enough ahead and didn't notice it until it was too late."

Here, the rider has thought through why he didn't see the gravel and has decided it had to do with where he was looking.

My point is that regardless of the word one uses, one can either deflect responsibility or take responsibility. On the matter of taking responsibility, I think you and I agree.
 
There's a reason, when you get an "accident" report from the police, it's called a "Collision Report" not an Accident Report (or at least it was where I worked, just for this very reason - SOMEONE was at fault, if not multiple someones, and all 'accidents' were avoidable, and "accident" led far too many to think in terms of "there's nothing I could have done").

While I think most everyone here is 100% supportive of riders learning to take responsibility for their parts in what happens to them, sometimes words matter. When most people think of something being an accident, they are removing blame from themselves for the situation.

Semantics aside, I know most everyone here goes out of their way to teach, show, and take responsability for what a rider can do to prevent crashes/collisions/accidents and most people here are painfully aware that there is almost always SOMETHING we could have done differently - and even on the rare occasions where there really wasn't much that could have prevented something (other than not riding), we recognize that SOMEONE is still likely at fault.
 
Honey Badger said:
There's a reason, when you get an "accident" report from the police, it's called a "Collision Report" not an Accident Report (or at least it was where I worked, just for this very reason - SOMEONE was at fault, if not multiple someones, and all 'accidents' were avoidable, and "accident" led far too many to think in terms of "there's nothing I could have done").

While I think most everyone here is 100% supportive of riders learning to take responsibility for their parts in what happens to them, sometimes words matter. When most people think of something being an accident, they are removing blame from themselves for the situation.

Semantics aside, I know most everyone here goes out of their way to teach, show, and take responsability for what a rider can do to prevent crashes/collisions/accidents and most people here are painfully aware that there is almost always SOMETHING we could have done differently - and even on the rare occasions where there really wasn't much that could have prevented something (other than not riding), we recognize that SOMEONE is still likely at fault.
Click to expand...
There are a few scenarios where nobody is at fault.

I've seen a video of a deer broadsiding a motorcyclist. Unless the rider was at fault simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, he wasn't at fault.

Hitting a deer that jumps out in front of you is more vague (and most likely more common), of course.
 
Junkie said:
There are a few scenarios where nobody is at fault.

I've seen a video of a deer broadsiding a motorcyclist. Unless the rider was at fault simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, he wasn't at fault.

Hitting a deer that jumps out in front of you is more vague (and most likely more common), of course.
Click to expand...

Not the point. Point is: your attitude can affect your outcome. If your attitude is that "accidents will happen", you're giving up some of your control. It doesn't mean accidents don't or can't happen.

There will always be a story about that one time when a rider was stopped at a red light on a divided road and a cement truck came barreling through the red light from the opposite direction, crossed over, and plowed headlong into the biker sitting at the front of the line (I read a news item in which this very thing occurred). OK. You got me. That can happen. Nevertheless, I still strongly recommend that you ride like I suggested - own your ride, own your safety, do everything you can to keep them from getting you, no matter how hard they try!

(FWIW, I did hit a deer - yearling mule deer in Utah. Two up, going 50-60 mph. Did not go down. What more could I have done? Well - I could have slowed down to about 30 given the conditions - dusk, two lane road, three miles or so out of town, several deer spotted previously within 20 yards of the road. So I collided with a mule deer - I guess that's a crash, although it didn't put me on the ground. Whatever it was, I don't think about it or talk about it as an "accident").

Really, guys - I don't mean for this to be a debate. It's just a thought. If it works for you, great. If not, no worries - think about your ride however you want, whatever works for you is great. Honestly.
 
Honey Badger said:
There's a reason, when you get an "accident" report from the police, it's called a "Collision Report" not an Accident Report (or at least it was where I worked, just for this very reason - SOMEONE was at fault, if not multiple someones, and all 'accidents' were avoidable, and "accident" led far too many to think in terms of "there's nothing I could have done").

While I think most everyone here is 100% supportive of riders learning to take responsibility for their parts in what happens to them, sometimes words matter. When most people think of something being an accident, they are removing blame from themselves for the situation.

Semantics aside, I know most everyone here goes out of their way to teach, show, and take responsability for what a rider can do to prevent crashes/collisions/accidents and most people here are painfully aware that there is almost always SOMETHING we could have done differently - and even on the rare occasions where there really wasn't much that could have prevented something (other than not riding), we recognize that SOMEONE is still likely at fault.
Click to expand...
While I am not trying to deflect from people taking responsibility for mistakes, they are still just mistakes. What has happened socially is that we severely punish people for minor mistakes. You can really get hit hard if you have a collision deemed your fault, when there might have been many mitigating circumstances that caused the mistake. People don't stop when they have an accident, like they use to do. They don't help other people on the side of the road, like they use to do. Etcetera. It might be too damn expensive, so people run and hide.
 
ThinkFast said:
.........
There will always be a story about that one time when a rider was stopped at a red light on a divided road and a cement truck came barreling through the red light from the opposite direction, crossed over, and plowed headlong into the biker. .........
Click to expand...
I had a head on with a Land Cruiser who was on the wrong side of the road. I just missed death. You can read about here. Some place. Shit really does happen.
 
clutchslip said:
While I am not trying to deflect from people taking responsibility for mistakes, they are still just mistakes. What has happened socially is that we severely punish people for minor mistakes. You can really get hit hard if you have a collision deemed your fault, when there might have been many mitigating circumstances that caused the mistake. People don't stop when they have an accident, like they use to do. They don't help other people on the side of the road, like they use to do. Etcetera. It might be too damn expensive, so people run and hide.
Click to expand...

I had a long response typed out but it was running off in tangents....but basically, accidents/collisions/etc are expensive, especially if someone got hurt. SOMEONE is paying those bills, why should it not be the party who made the mistake to begin with? Why should it ruin the other party's life/finances (assuming) they did nothing wrong in a situation where there is an expectation of safety and behavior governed by laws?

As for our litigious society, well, that sounds like a topic for the Politics forum, and while I have opinions on a lot of that, this topic and forum is not the place for it.
 
Honey Badger said:
.........SOMEONE is paying those bills, why should it not be the party who made the mistake to begin with? Why should it ruin the other party's life/finances (assuming) they did nothing wrong in a situation where there is an expectation of safety and behavior governed by laws?.......
Click to expand...
Did I not start with, "I am not trying to deflect from people taking responsibility for mistakes"? If you have an "accident" not only are you going to pay for expenses of the inflicted, but your insurance will go up, your driving recored is effected. We know that plenty of extra expenses are payed by insurance that go beyond the basic injuries or vehicle repairs. That hits everyone who actually has insurance. We have the highest percentage of uninsured in California, ever. Perhaps if we dealt with accidents with more "no fault" then more people could afford insurance. Perhaps we should expand the insurance pool to included everyone, like with earthquake insurance in California. Let the state organize it, since they approve of many foreigners getting licenses whether they have insurance or not. I bet MY rates would go down. :party
 
Got it. It's a pretty different scenario than what we're talking about.

I'll try to let the word parsing go, as I don't think anyone in the thread has much difference WRT the idea that riders are best off taking responsibility for everything in their approach to riding.
 
tzrider said:
Got it. It's a pretty different scenario than what we're talking about.

I'll try to let the word parsing go, as I don't think anyone in the thread has much difference WRT the idea that riders are best off taking responsibility for everything in their approach to riding.
Click to expand...
The issue is that saying something is an accident propagates the idea that there is no intent or responsibility. It just happens.

Once you lessen the event, personal responsibility takes a back seat, from a societal point of view.

Since my dad was killed by a drunk driver and I was hurt badly, I’ve always had an issue with how we do parse language.

Sometimes a change of language can change how society views something
 
Lewd_Ferrigno said:
The issue is that saying something is an accident propagates the idea that there is no intent or responsibility. It just happens.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. This is where I keep saying you guys are redefining a word. "Accident" makes no judgement one way or the other on whether the cause was random or negligent. Your insurance company will refer to a collision as an accident and if you're at fault, they'll be sure to let you know.
 
tzrider said:
No, it doesn't. This is where I keep saying you guys are redefining a word. "Accident" makes no judgement one way or the other on whether the cause was random or negligent. Your insurance company will refer to a collision as an accident and if you're at fault, they'll be sure to let you know.
Click to expand...

There's no primary actor in an accident. It's not a verb, it's a noun. Crash can be used both ways.

"I crashed" - forces you to own what happened.
"I was in an accident" - leaves entirely open who did what to whom.

So, no. No one is trying to redefine a word. The original argument is simply based on the notion that when I decide to only think in terms of "crashing", and doing whatever I can to avoid it, I remove the "shit happens" option from my thinking. Doesn't mean it won't happen - just means my mindset is not as victim, but as primary actor.

There is nothing implied about the legal or insurance side of this - totally irrelevant to the discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top