Forty tells Twenty, but Twenty doesn't believe him. Then, Twenty suddenly finds himself forty. Finally, Twenty understands what Forty was trying to tell him almost twenty years ago... But then Forty turns Sixty and says nevermind what Forty said.... I don't know what he was thinking.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
I don't try to degrade anyone.. but like you, I try to make sure that both sides of the issue are represented. That way there is balance... If you read some of my comments from 4 years ago, You would swear it was a different person writing them. </end quote></div>

- One wise man that all the Forties and Twenties would be lucky to know.

 

I don't have all the answers.. but I try to help people expand their minds a bit. Like I said before, we are all so wrapped up in our own thing that we don't even try to understand the other guy's perspective. Hopefully if they can see the other side, and I see their's we can find common ground, and both of us are better for it.

Y'all take care and keep pushing forward. Together, we will find answers towards the common good. Seperately, we lose perspective and are bound to fail....

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>"Forty tells Twenty, but Twenty doesn't believe him. Then, Twenty suddenly finds himself forty. Finally, Twenty understands what Forty was trying to tell him almost twenty years ago... But then Forty turns Sixty and says nevermind what Forty said.... I don't know what he was thinking"

JustRandy</end quote></div>

The ages, whether 20, 40, or 60, are mearly a conceptual metaphor identifying the fact that throughout the ages experienced men have tried to explain things to inexperienced men, but they just don't get it...

Thank you for proving this theory.

 

Well said!

I've been thinking a lot about all the topics we've been discussing. I talk highly of a guy I know online that gives out gear to kids at riding areas and buys helmets for people that can't afford them. I learned that the dealer here automatically gives everyone a helmet with each purchase (you pay for it, you just don't know you do [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] ). I've been trying to put myself in everyone's position and understand their way of thinking, and I've learned a lot from doing that. But I also get stressed out a lot from doing that because I know some people just aren't happy unless they can bend the will of the world to their way of thinking (ie. radical muslims, door-to-door Christians, etc,,, to say the least). Some people think they know it all, or at least they think they know more than some others and they use every method in their power to meddle in other's affairs when in fact its none of their business. Those are the people I can't understand.

Hey Gary, seriously, what do you think of the parents that ended up letting their child die because it was against their religion to take her to the doctor? Its in the news now. She had type I diabetes and didn't get the insulin she needed because her parents believed God would heal her. I'm not sure what to make of it.... I want to say its none of my business, but the public seems to be making a big deal out of it. I guess if she was my friend, I might have been angry. If she was my relative, I might have been angry. But I don't know her and it seems like the parents might have a right to choose the medical care they and their kids get. For instance, I don't want the public dictating to me I have to take drugs or surgery when I might choose some other method of healing. Too many times western medicine is wrong and is constantly being revisied.... Even JAMA said doctors are the 3rd leading cause of death in the US. Not very comforting to know that. JAMA is about as respected as it gets! Should I be required by law to take my kids to a person that is the 3rd leading cause of death? How should I think on this subject?

 

I don't know Randy... That is a rough one. What I think is right in my mind may not always be the right answer. Trying to compare this situation to the decision to not wear a helmet for example is an unfair comparison.

The decision the parents you mention made has a pretty high probability that something bad is going to happen. Where the helmet question or age of a child riding a full sized machine is more of a potential outcome. Being a Type 1 diabetic myself, I know that the tests that were perfomed are pretty conclusive.

What you are trying to get me to say is that it is the parent's decision, and although I might think that way in some cases, I can't say that I believe that is the case all the time. I believe the court system has much more wisdom in this regard than I do, and must defer to the local authorities to act as an advocate for the child. Again that would depend on local conditions and not an all or nothing interpretation.

I have great respect for the family's religious beliefs and convictions, but I have to say I can't really put myself in their shoes because I am weaker in that regard than they are... I can sure admire their stong faith, but I doubt I could be strong enough to come to the same conclusion. My only response would be to pray for them both. The parents, and the child.. and hope they both find peace.

My age has taught me that there are subjects that will get you in a fight quicker than anything. One, don't discuss a person's religious beliefs, 2) don't criticise a person's Mother or Spouse, and 3) Dont ever damage another man's vehicle.

I think this subject crosses multiple lines... Sorry if that wasn't the answer you were looking for... I am not claiming to be a higher power.

 

I just wanted your sagely input because I value it, not because I'm trying to practice my verbal judo on you, lol. I honestly wasn't trying to lead you to say one thing or another, its just been on my mind for a few days to ask you and I finally saw an opportunity and the same time that I remembered.

Yeah, I agree it doesn't directly correlate to the helmet or age limit situation, although there may be some similarities. I also agree that Type I diabetes is has a pretty clear-cut cause and has clear-cut management routines, unlike,,, say, heart disease treated with cholesterol lowering drugs.

That situation reminds me of the joke I heard as a kid. There was a flood and a boat came by and warned a man to get in the boat. He said, "God's going to take care of me!". So the boat went on. Later, the man is standing on his roof and the boat came back and told him to get in. The man said, "God's going to take care of me!" So the boat went on. Later, the man is at the top of a tall tree. A helicopter came by and said, "Grab the rope!". The man said, "God's going to take care of me!" Well, the man drowns and ends up in heaven and asks God why he didn't save him. God said, "I sent you 2 boats and a helicopter!!!"

It seems pretty obvious to me that God sent boats and helicopters to the parents of the girl that died, but I guess it wasn't so obvious to them. I think the best thing that came from this discussion is, "My only response would be to pray for them both. The parents, and the child.. and hope they both find peace." That's all I really want. But I don't think the public will grant them peace. I think they require revenge for something that was not so much stolen from them, but was stolen more from the parents. So, not only have the parents lost a daughter, they will inherit the wrath of a closed-minded public. A very depressing situation.... and I'm not exactly sure what's right, but I'm glad you took the time to opine.

 

I've run accross a few like that in my travels too. I believe that no matter what anyone else says, or what happens to the parents, they will be stronger for it. It is easy for us to sit in judgement, but hard for us to fathom what went through their hearts and minds as they watched the most precious gift they have ever had whither away slowly. Nothing man or the courts can do is going to make it easier, or punish them any harder than what they have already suffered. To us it is but a moment in time.. or an article on the evening news... to them it was their world torn in two.

I just hope that this experience has made their bond stronger in ways that we can't ever imagine. The real tragedy would be for the parents to second guess their decisions, and it drive a wedge between them. In this case, if I were a friend, or family, I would hope they would offer strength and support... Not criticism and unbelief...

I think that is what makes humans different than animals. We have the ability to exercise compassion and feel genuine empathy towards the parents. I think for this reason, as we have discussed before, I would not be so quick to judge parents whose child gets hurt or kiled on an ATV either. You have to look at the situation, and judge each case accordingly.

True neglect will without a doubt make itself known. Mistakes in judgement are harder to deal with, and although I do believe some form of consequence may be in order, I do not believe throwing them in jail is the answer either.

This thread started with the question regarding size versus age as stated in the CPSC guidelines. To me, I believe they have a lot of merit if they are implimented properly. And when I say that, I believe for novice riders, they do a very good job of categorizing new rider abilities and may for obvious reasons err on the safe side.

I have criticised them for two reasons.

1), there is no formal means for riders to demonstrate ability, and therefor move up in class of machine without purely aging in years.

2), is the size gap for the 12 to 16 age group.

At no time will a child's skill develpment grow at a faster pace. With puberty, physical size and strength grow by leaps and bounds, and the average pre-teen, to 16 will actually be placed in a higher risk category because they are in some cases FORCED to ride larger machines because the mini's do not fit their physical size requirements.

Case in point, I have a 12 year old that is almost 6 ft tall. Put him on an average mini, and his knees end up in his chest when he sits on his machine. Not a safe circumstance by any means.

The manufacturers need to build a bridge class chassis with smaller motors to better fit them.

I also believe that the 12 to 16 year age group could safely handle up to a 250 CC machine. I have held impromptu surveys in the past, and this seems to be a recurring theme.

Most parents I speak with feel that if their child were able to legally get on a 250, they would buy one in a heart beat instead of putting their child on a much larger machine.

So in this case, I think the parent might be the best judge of their child's state of skills development. But I want to re-emphasize that there has to be a starting point, and that I do NOT advocate placing a total novice on one of these. A 250 powerplant can produce some impressive numbers in the power range, and would without a doubt be way to far out of a novices realm of skill.

Like it or not parents, when you commit to allowing a child to become an ATV rider, there should be a realization on your part that you will be trading machines on a regular basis as they grow. Like a bicycle, you have to buy them to fit the child in different stages of their learning curve and growth cycles. Just like it would be dangerous to put a 6 year old on a 26 inch mountain bike, it would be dangerous to put a 10 year old on a 350 or larger. If you can't afford it, then just say NO.

 

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

I've run accross a few like that in my travels too. I believe that no matter what anyone else says, or what happens to the parents, they will be stronger for it. It is easy for us to sit in judgement, but hard for us to fathom what went through their hearts and minds as they watched the most precious gift they have ever had whither away slowly. Nothing man or the courts can do is going to make it easier, or punish them any harder than what they have already suffered. To us it is but a moment in time.. or an article on the evening news... to them it was their world torn in two. </end quote></div>

You nailed it! (Wish I could write like that).


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
I just hope that this experience has made their bond stronger in ways that we can't ever imagine. The real tragedy would be for the parents to second guess their decisions, and it drive a wedge between them. In this case, if I were a friend, or family, I would hope they would offer strength and support... Not criticism and unbelief... </end quote></div>

A relative is the one that called 911 in the first place... So, I doubt they will be very supportive, unfortunately. Their faith will be tried and over the coming years they may even lose their faith. This is starting to remind me a bit of the story of Job.


<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
I think that is what makes humans different than animals. We have the ability to exercise compassion and feel genuine empathy towards the parents. I think for this reason, as we have discussed before, I would not be so quick to judge parents whose child gets hurt or kiled on an ATV either. You have to look at the situation, and judge each case accordingly.


True neglect will without a doubt make itself known. Mistakes in judgement are harder to deal with, and although I do believe some form of consequence may be in order, I do not believe throwing them in jail is the answer either.</end quote></div>

Yes, it would almost be like if my car gets stolen and they throw me in jail for leaving the keys in it.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
This thread started with the question regarding size versus age as stated in the CPSC guidelines. To me, I believe they have a lot of merit if they are implimented properly. And when I say that, I believe for novice riders, they do a very good job of categorizing new rider abilities and may for obvious reasons err on the safe side.



I have criticised them for two reasons.



1), there is no formal means for riders to demonstrate ability, and therefor move up in class of machine without purely aging in years.



2), is the size gap for the 12 to 16 age group.



At no time will a child's skill develpment grow at a faster pace. With puberty, physical size and strength grow by leaps and bounds, and the average pre-teen, to 16 will actually be placed in a higher risk category because they are in some cases FORCED to ride larger machines because the mini's do not fit their physical size requirements.



Case in point, I have a 12 year old that is almost 6 ft tall. Put him on an average mini, and his knees end up in his chest when he sits on his machine. Not a safe circumstance by any means.



The manufacturers need to build a bridge class chassis with smaller motors to better fit them.



I also believe that the 12 to 16 year age group could safely handle up to a 250 CC machine. I have held impromptu surveys in the past, and this seems to be a recurring theme.



Most parents I speak with feel that if their child were able to legally get on a 250, they would buy one in a heart beat instead of putting their child on a much larger machine.



So in this case, I think the parent might be the best judge of their child's state of skills development. But I want to re-emphasize that there has to be a starting point, and that I do NOT advocate placing a total novice on one of these. A 250 powerplant can produce some impressive numbers in the power range, and would without a doubt be way to far out of a novices realm of skill.



Like it or not parents, when you commit to allowing a child to become an ATV rider, there should be a realization on your part that you will be trading machines on a regular basis as they grow. Like a bicycle, you have to buy them to fit the child in different stages of their learning curve and growth cycles. Just like it would be dangerous to put a 6 year old on a 26 inch mountain bike, it would be dangerous to put a 10 year old on a 350 or larger. If you can't afford it, then just say NO.</end quote></div>


Yes, I agree with all that. The biggest problem I have with small quads is the way they handle. The only chassis designed properly is the R450 and maybe KTM's new quad. All the rest are compromises in design and they get worse as cc's goes down. Put a 100cc engine in the 450 frame and it would be the safest quad around.

Check this out http://forums.atvconnection.co...did=539973&startpage=1 It has a happy ending.

 

I could go for that.. It would keep the kids off the big bore quads while providing a safe machine that is properly sized for their body. Believe me, they will have fun on it no matter what size the motor. I believe one of the major flaws with the mini's in particular is the narrow tread width. If they would just make them 2 inches wider, the stability would jump by leaps and bounds. That is why I always recommend to parents that they put on spacers to widen the mini's. Sure they will have ot spend a few bucks, but the safety margin is greatly enhanced. And that is what it is all about anyway. The original though process was based on being able to throw the machine in the back of a pickup, or family station wagon. That is old school. WIth the power and engine size wars that is going on today, they NEED to be wider just to maintain some semblance of sanity.

 

I don't think it would cost much more for the manufacturers to just make them wider to begin with. For a quad with a 30 inch seat height, it should have just short of 50 inches in the front.... or 47 minimum. And the wheelbase should be just long enough so all 4 wheels don't make a square. That's a pretty stable and fun chassis. I suppose all the numbers are proportional, so a quad with a 15 inch seat height would be 25 inches wide and so on. Otherwise they are pretty top heavy and make it easy to bicycle in turns.

I know if I was a kid, I would want something stable and something closer to my own body weight so I could throw it around a little. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] That's why I like the 230s, it weighs only 315lb with a full tank. And one of these days I'd like to get the weight down with an aluminum frame. I could bunny hop over logs then. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]