For example......take a look at Windtrader, posted on 11/16..........see any comments about feds and access?? Scan back through the rest of the posts to January, several mention loss of public access shifting use to state and private lands. Less access means more crowding or less riding or more safety issues. Tass

 

I fail to see how Windtraders 2 off-topic sentences during his self-described 40 line "roll" has anything to do with the topic of this thread?

Topic Title:
"Stupid Kills? or What can the ATV community do to reduce the number of serious injuries?"

As for the few other references to Federal land closures posted here since January, these were also off the topic, and most were posted by one individual whose intentions were to create discourse.

Additionally, the data does not show any correlation between the numbers of ATV accidents resulting in serious injuries or death, and any Federal land closure; anywhere.

What is causing more ATV accidents resulting in serious injuries and deaths was vividly described in a news article from the Tulsa, OK area this morning.

"About 5:30 Thursday afternoon, a single rider adult sized ATV, driven by a 13-year-old boy and carrying a 24-year-old adult male passenger, was being operated on a Rogers County, Oklahoma street when it crashed into a brick mail box along the side of the road. The 13-year-old operator was pinned in the wreckage and died at the scene of massive head and chest injuries. The 24-year-old adult passenger was ejected from the ATV upon impact, and was air lifted to a Tulsa area hospital with head and extremity injuries. Oklahoma Highway Patrol Troopers investigating the accident state the causes as:


#1. Excessive speed during the illegal operation of an off-highway vehicle (ATV) on a paved roadway.

#2. Permission granted for the operation of an ATV designed for persons 16 and over, by a 13-year-old, as granted by the adult.

#3. Carrying of a passenger on a single seat ATV (designed for only one rider), thus reducing control of the vehicle.

#4. Inexperience of the ATV operator resulting in loss of control and collision with an immovable object.

#5. Failure of the operator or passenger to wear a helmet, or any other recommended protective device.


This one very sad, but totally preventable, Thanksgiving Day event sums up the problem in 5 short lines.

Of course, some will blame this tradgedy on the brick mail box; but let's be real.

In stead, let's come up with actions designed to effect change in the behaviors which killed this 13-year-old boy!

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>In stead, let's come up with actions designed to effect change in the behaviors which killed this 13-year-old boy! </end quote></div>This is so sad and reported far too often: another unnecessary death associated with irresponsible ATV operation.

There so few basic "golden rules" to safe ATV operation for rider to follow, I feel at a complete loss to what can effect true change in ATV rider common sense. We have discussed many options, everything from voluntary and mandatory training and licensing, to more rigorous regulation of the vehicles safety features and design.

Maybe it is the excessive bloat from too much turkey effecting a defeated attitude but so much of these senseless deaths come down to outright stupidity, and there is little that can be done to force people to be less stupid and make more responsible decisions and behave more responsibly.

I'm not in any way implying stupid ATV operators are criminals but why are are our prisons bursting at the seams? Don't you think that 95% of the incarcerated knew what they did and the decisions they made would land them in jail if caught? I'll draw a parallel to stupid ATV riding, don't you think that nearly all know that it is safer to ride with a helmet, not ride on public streets, no double riding ..., create unsafe and hazardous riding situations?

It becomes clearer to me with each passing day and each new unnecessary death or injury, that STUPID kills and there is nothing we can do to fix STUPID! You can force people to sit through a safety class but you can not make them understand and APPLY basic common safety practices.

To this point, I have tried to maintain an open mind about the issue of ATV safety and what to advocate to promote safer riding, specifically less injury and death, and it is clear to me things can be done to develop and support the adoption of the generally agreed "golden rules" such as banning on-road ATV riding, double riding, etc. across all US jurisdictions. I do not support mandatory training but support offering vigorous education opportunities to all riders, at point of sale, and riding venues, everything from pamphlets, "golden rules" stamped on each riding park receipt, to kevlar hang tags with safety training certificates and incentives.

The goal is that no rider can ever honestly claiming ignorance of the basic sfatey rules. Having these things in place will reduce needless death and injury but never eliminate it, as STUPID is an incurable disease, and stupid is as stupid does and that will never change.

 

Recognizing the police can't be everywhere, if an officer had witnessed the pre-collision activity, only #1. below includes any citable offenses in Oklahoma; speeding and the on-highway operation of an ATV. While I would also argue for taking action against the adult for sponsoring unsafe ATV operation, outside of being involved in an accident, I doubt any L.E.O. would cite or arrest for the 'child endangerment' element here.


#1. Excessive speed during the illegal operation of an off-highway vehicle (ATV) on a paved roadway.

#2. Permission granted for the operation of an ATV designed for persons 16 and over, by a 13-year-old, as granted by the adult.

#3. Carrying of a passenger on a single seat ATV (designed for only one rider), thus reducing control of the vehicle.

#4. Inexperience of the ATV operator resulting in loss of control and collision with an immovable object.

#5. Failure of the operator or passenger to wear a helmet, or any other recommended protective device.


However, if that same L.E.O. pulled over a speeding reckless automobile and found it to be operated on a highway by a 13-year-old boy, with a 24-year-old relative riding as a passenger, would the adult face citations and possible arrest? Absolutely!

So..., what's the difference?[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img]

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>So..., what's the difference?</end quote></div>Man - you gotta start using them emoticons or move to "land of nuts and fruitcakes". You gotta be kidding? The difference is car vs atv which may as well be tricycle vs mac truck. The general guiding principle for enacting law is for the benefit and protection of the "public". A car is a lethal weapon. able to kill others on the orad, while an ATV is hardly able to cause injury to anyone inside an operating motor vehicle. Plus ATV use is/should be confined to off road use, thus autos and atvs do not interact. If someone wants to voluntarily enjoin in an activity with known hazards and harm is primarily limited to its participants, then there is not going to be any will to enact legislation to regulate that activity, plain and simple, dude! :-)

 

EEResQ. References by myself, Windtrader, or others to changes in the access to public land is definitely not "off topic" in a discussion addressing ATV operation, safety, regulation, hazards or training. Most off road incidents are not now reported because they involve unlicenced vehicles off highway or on trails. These riders and their machines are not going to just disappear because the Feds force citizens from public land. They will ride when they can, where they can. Do you seriously believe this is not going to cause huge impacts to the world of ATV use? Perhaps you are under the opinion that those off-highway riders will simply park the ol machine beside the house and let it rust. The challenges facing the ATV community now will be nothing compared to the tremendous task of attempting to train, educate and legitimize the actions of the additional thousands of riders and machines that will have to come in "out of the forests". Tass

 

Ya know, we don't need to be attacking each other here... the real reason we can't seem to come up with solutions is that our biggest strength in difference of opinion is also the biggest hurdle if we can't seem to allow differring opinion in an open forum.... Now THAT is probably the hardest thing I have said in a long time.... Hmmm. Back to topic shall we?

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: windtrader

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>So..., what's the difference?</end quote></div>Man - you gotta start using them emoticons or move to "land of nuts and fruitcakes". You gotta be kidding? </end quote></div>

First: They have yet to come up with a cute little symbol which reflects a "Rhetorical Question."

Second: I find little that is cute in this topic.

Third: As a rhetorical question is posed without expectation of an answer, but merely as a way of making a point, the point you AGAIN are missing is this --

When an adult knowingly puts a child in a position of danger, that adult is responsible for anything that happens to the child as a direct result of the position he or she so sponsored."

Fourth: <div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Plus ATV use is/should be confined to off road use, thus autos and atvs do not interact. If someone wants to voluntarily enjoin in an activity with known hazards and harm is primarily limited to its participants, then there is not going to be any will to enact legislation to regulate that activity, plain and simple, dude!</end quote></div>

FACT #1: While regulated in most states, ATV use is NOT effectively confined to off road use as enforcement is limited. As such, autos and ATVs DO interact; as DO trucks and ATVs, as well as DO the occasional south bound train and ATVs interact. (I have access to examples of all of these if you wish.)

FACT #2: A 13-year-old boy's "voluntary" involvement in riding double on an adult's ATV while on a roadway which results in "massive head and chest injuries" DOES HARM to hundreds of family members, close friends and classmates. Also theoretically, let's assume he could have missed the brick mail box; what about the driver of the automobile he could have collided with? Again, another point you fail to see is that HARM isn't restricted to physical injuries?

FACT #3: With a few exceptions, the legislation needed to regulate this activity is already on the books. What's lacking is the enforcement of those laws as they apply to "Off-Highway Vehicles being operated on highways." Again, the point you fail to see is that for every 4 serious ATV accidents off-road, another 6 occur on / or immediately adjacent to / a highway."

Here's one a little closer to home for you. Maybe it will awaken you to the bigger picture:
Child Dies From ATV Accident on CA HWY 58


Here's another one in CA that doesn't completely fit your view of the problem:
Family, Classmates Remember Norco Girl Killed In ATV / Train Crash


This ATV accident occured last Saturday, it resulted in 2 children dead and 1 in critical condition.

Here's what CHP had to say:

"A safety mistake causes 99 percent of what happens down there (Glamis Dunes)."

However, this accident was unlike most in the area, because it did not happen off-road.

At about 3:25 p.m. on Saturday, Samantha was driving a Rhino quad westbound on CA State Route 78 toward a popular camping area near the Glamis Store when she came to train tracks with the crossing gate down, CHP Sgt. David Nunez said.

She apparently waited for a slow-moving northbound Union Pacific train to pass, then this 15-year-old non-driver pulled around the crossing gate to cross the tracks. A second train traveling southbound hit the ATV and pushed it down the tracks.

Samantha died immediately at the scene from multiple traumatic injuries, according to Sgt. Charles Lucas, of the Imperial County coroner's office. Her 9-year-old passenger, whom Marcus Bestwick identified as Jacob Gonzales, died later that day at Rady Children's Hospital in San Diego, according to the San Diego medical examiner's office. Bestwick identified the other passenger as Amanda Gonzales, 15. She was transported to a Phoenix hospital by helicopter after the accident and is listed in critical condition, Nunez said.

Yes Windtrader, ATV accidents DO occur off road, and on highways, and even on railroad tracks that cross those highways. Unfortunantely, more and more often, they involve kids not old enough to drive an automobile on those highways. But, they're old enough to be killed while driving ATVs on those highways.

Come on, get your head out of the THC cloud and think!

 

lAlright, I lost my last baggie while in a purple-haze stupor; serves me right. Now seeing that the air is actually not hazy all the time, I do get what you are saying.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>When an adult knowingly puts a child in a position of danger, that adult is responsible for anything that happens to the child as a direct result of the position he or she so sponsored." </end quote></div>Is this a basic tenant of common law or acceptable as the basis for criminal or civil action? Not rhetorical as I really do not know.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>While I would also argue for taking action against the adult for sponsoring unsafe ATV operation, outside of being involved in an accident, I doubt any L.E.O. would cite or arrest for the 'child endangerment' element here. </end quote></div>

If in fact, the issue is more lack of enforcement of existing ATV related laws and above statement, then why aren't they being enforced? If existing laws do not clearly detail that any underage child involved in ATV operations must be supervised by an adult and that adult assumes all responsibility associated with that child's ATV riding, then that is one thing I am sure we all can agree on getting behind to help reduce kills of innocents.

I'm certainly willing to set aside further discussion about how to reduce what I call "stupid kills", those involving adult riders and concentrate on "innocent kills", underage riders with or without direct adult supervision. I'll pursue some research and examine the extent of adult responsibility laws on the books and if so, are they being pursued in cases similar to what you have kindly posted here. Any references certainly welcome.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>FACT #3: With a few exceptions, the legislation needed to regulate this activity is already on the books. What's lacking is the enforcement of those laws as they apply to "Off-Highway Vehicles being operated on highways." Again, the point you fail to see is that for every 4 serious ATV accidents off-road, another 6 occur on / or immediately adjacent to / a highway." </end quote></div>What in your opinion is the reason for the lack of enforcement of existing statue? It seems maybe the training should be directed at LEO and LEA if that is the case, and I don't recollect much discussion about this being a potential solution but one I'd back.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>EEResQ. References by myself, Windtrader, or others to changes in the access to public land is definitely not "off topic" in a discussion addressing ATV operation, safety, regulation, hazards or training.

Most off road incidents are not now reported because they involve unlicensed vehicles off highway or on trails. </end quote></div>
@Tass - I have never drawn any connection between access to public lands and ATV safety implications, unless you mean public lands includes riding on public roadways. Accidents happen both on public roads, private land, and public lands such as USFS and BLM. There is a vigorous effort underway by the USFS to inventory the forest roads and restrict ATV access to many current trails which will fall into the "uninventoried" thus off limits. But this activity has minimal if any relationship to the topic of making ATV riding safer.

EEResQ - Even if we were to eliminate all underage ATV deaths that still leaves a whopping 75% to work on. I'm going on a figure I think was quoted that 25% of the reported incidents involve underage participants.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>
State of California Off Highway Vehicle Laws
This is only a partial list of regulations pertaining to OHV's. For a complete listing, see Division 16.5 of the California Vehicle Code (C.V.C.).

OHVS ON ROADWAYS. No person shall operate or drive an off-highway vehicle on a roadway, except to cross at an angle of approximately 90 degrees and in a quick and safe manner. (38025a C.V.C.)

HELMET USAGE. All persons, regardless of age, who operate or ride all terrain vehicles (ATV's) on public lands in California must wear an approved safety helmet. (38505 C.V.C.)

PARENTAL SUPERVISION. No person under the age of 14 shall operate an all-terrain vehicle unless that person satisfies the requirements of 38503 C.V.C. (safety certification) and in addition, is accompanied by and under the direct supervision of a parent or guardian. (38504 C.V.C.). Neither a parent or guardian of a child who is under 14 years of age, nor an adult who is authorized by the parent or guardian to supervise that child shall grant permission to, or knowingly allow, that child to operate an ATV in a manner that violates Section 38504. (C.V.C. 38504.1)

REQUIRED RIDER SAFETY TRAINING. No person under the age of 18 shall operate an all-terrain vehicle(ATV) unless he/she has received the safety course in this state or another state or is under the direct supervision of an adult who has the appropriate safety certification in his/her possession (38503 C.V.C.) For ATV certification information, please contact the ATV Safety Institute (ASI) at 949-727-3727.

NOISE RESTRICTIONS.

1. Noise emissions of off-highway vehicles shall be limited to not more than 96 dbA if manufactured on or after January 1, 1986, and not more than 101 dbA if manufactured prior to January 1, 1986. Other restrictions may apply. Please visit CA OHMVRD web site for more information.
2. Sirens (38375 C.V.C.)
1. An off-highway motor vehicle, except an authorized emergency vehicle, shall not be equipped with a siren.
2. A person driving an off-highway motor vehicle, except the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle as permitted by 21055, shall not use a siren.

CARRYING OF PASSENGERS. No operator of an all-terrain vehicle may carry a passenger when operating on public lands. However, the operator of an all-terrain vehicle, that is designed for operation off of the highway by an operator with no more than one passenger, may carry a passenger when operating on public lands. (38506 C.V.C.)

OPERATING AN OHV UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL AND/OR DRUGS. It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug, or under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and any drug, to drive a vehicle. (23152(a) C.V.C.). Driving while license is suspended/revoked off road as well as on road is against the law. (14601 C.V.C.)

SPEED LAWS.
1. Basic speed law: Don't operate an off-highway vehicle faster than it is safe for conditions. (38305 C.V.C.)
2. Prima Facie Speed Limit: The prima facie speed limit within 50 feet of any campground, campsite, or concentration of people or animals shall be under 15 m.p.h. unless changed as authorized by the code. (38310 C.V.C.)

REGISTRATION.
1. Vehicles operated on federal and state highways, county roads, and BLM's Gecko Road, Gray's Well Road, and McCain Valley must be licensed for highway use.
2. Off highway vehicles owned by California residents must be registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles and display a valid Green Sticker or Red Sticker Vehicle Identification Tag (38020,38010 C.V.C.) in a clearly visible location on the vehicle. (38170 C.V.C.) View Red Sticker riding schedule .
3. Off highway vehicles that do not have a valid registration or permit from the owners home state (incl. Mexico and Canada) will be required to purchase a California nonresident permit (sticker) through selected vendors in CA, NV, AZ ( view vendor list 10/2007). Permits may also be purchased from CA Dept. of Parks and Recreation 916 324-4442. (38020 C.V.C.)

REQUIRED EQUIPMENT. According to California State law, any off highway vehicle must be equipped with an approved muffler, brakes, and spark arrester. Headlight and taillight are required for operation at night. Tail lights must include at least one red light .

LIGHT PROHIBITION. A person shall not display a flashing or steady burning red or blue warning light on an off-highway motor vehicle except as permitted by Section 21055 or when an extreme hazard exists. 38346 C.V.C.

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. No person shall operate on off-highway vehicle in a manner likely to cause environmental damage. (38319 C.V.C., 43 CFR 8341.1 {f} {4} ).

FIREARMS. California State law - Firearms must not be discharged within 150 yards of residences, buildings, campsites, occupied areas, RECREATIONAL AREAS, or domestic livestock. No shooting from or across any road. No shooting from a vehicle. It is unlawful to carry a loaded weapon in a vehicle.
</end quote></div>

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Conditions for Operating: Minors

38503. No person under the age of 18 years, on and after January 1, 1990, shall operate an all-terrain vehicle on public lands of this state unless the person satisfies one of the following conditions:

(a) The person is taking a prescribed safety training course under the direct supervision of a certified all-terrain vehicle safety instructor.

(b) The person is under the direct supervision of an adult who has in their possession an appropriate safety certificate issued by this state, or issued under the authority of another state.

(c) The person has in possession an appropriate safety certificate issued by this state or issued under the authority of another state.
Added Ch. 881, Stats. 1987. Effective January 1, 1988.</end quote></div>

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Conditions for Operating: Additional Requirements

38504. No person under 14 years of age, on and after January 1, 1990, shall operate an all-terrain vehicle on public lands of this state unless the person satisfies one of the conditions set forth in Section 38503 and, in addition, is accompanied by and under the direct supervision of a parent or guardian or is accompanied by and under the direct supervision of an adult who is authorized by the parent or guardian.

Added Ch. 881, Stats. 1987. Effective January 1, 1988.</end quote></div>

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Violation of Operating Conditions: Fines

38504.1. (a) Neither a parent or guardian of a child who is under 14 years of age, nor an adult who is authorized by the parent or guardian to supervise that child shall grant permission to, or knowingly allow, that child to operate an all-terrain vehicle in a manner that violates Section 38504.

(b) A person convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) is punishable as follows:

(1) For a first conviction, the court shall either impose a fine of one hundred twenty-five dollars ($125) or order the person to take or retake and complete an all-terrain vehicle safety training course pursuant to Section 38501. If ordered to take or retake and complete the safety training course, the person shall provide the court a copy of the all-terrain vehicles safety certificate issued as a result of that completion.

(2) For a second conviction, a fine of not less than one hundred twenty-five dollars ($125) nor more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250).

(3) For a third or any subsequent conviction, a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500).
Added Sec. 1, Ch. 195, Stats. 2006. Effective January 1, 2007.</end quote></div>

EEResQ -I got your answer in black and white. The penalties are not even as punitive as a jaywalking ticket. Maybe modifying the language such that it states all injury or damage occurring as a result of violating this law is directly the responsibility of the adult or guardian who was "in charge". I think current civil law allows someone to sue this adult for damages if the underage were to smash up another kid for example but it seems the legal consequences are woefully inadequate. But I am about as ignorant about legal stuff as knowing how to decommission spent radioactive fuel cells in a nuclear reactor. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]