Passes & Canyons Blog

An ABATE rider training course at Arapahoe Community College.

ABATE of Colorado has been forced out of the motorcycle rider training business. Once the largest training organization in the state, the future of the organization’s property and trainers remains unclear.

I first heard about this at the Last Brass Monkey Run on December 31 and had hoped to get more information about it but have not had the time. So I’ll give you what I can. Actually, I’ll quote you a bit of what ABATE State Coordinator Larry Montgomery had to say about it in the latest issue of ABATE’s newsletter, the Spokesman.

As most of you have heard by now, ABATE will no longer be allowed to provide motorcycle training in Colorado due to a supposed contract violation from MSF (Motorcycle Safety Foundation) and CSP (Colorado State Patrol), this went into effect November 3rd, 2025. . . ABATE tried to respond in numerous ways to the concerns MSF had regarding our quality of training for citizens of Colorado. This process was only done by email from MSF and CSP. They have never discussed in person any problems with anyone associated with ABATE. . .

The whole process seems strange to me as there were many people that knew about the decertification before I or the ABATE board received the letter of suspension from MSF and CSP.

As we move forward ABATE will continue as a SMRO (state motorcycle rights organization) organization and will continue to fight for motorcycle rights.

I’ve heard a number of things. The one most people seem to subscribe to is that ABATE had been a thorn in the side of folks at the state level running the rider training system in the state and they decided to put a stop to it. I don’t claim to know what the motivation was. I certainly was not aware of ABATE’s training program being out of compliance with the rules.

What does it mean for ABATE to lose its certification? Can’t the organization offer training on its own? Yes, it can. The issue is that with state certification you can train someone and test them on the riding portion of the motorcyclist licensing process and they can then take that certificate to the DMV and all they need to do to finish getting motorcycle certified is to pass the written test. Without certification, ABATE trainees would need to take the written and driving tests. Because other organizations offer the certification, students would presumably be more inclined to sign up elsewhere.

The other thing it means is that Colorado is likely to be severely short of riding training programs, making it harder for those who want training to find someone nearby who offers it. ABATE was just about the only organization to offer training in several large portions of the state. Those people in particular will be hard hit by this situation.

It’s hard to say what happens from here. I’ll pass along what I hear.

Biker Quote for Today

Never breathe within forty yards of roadkill.

You don’t suppose there might be some inherent risk involved in racing a motorcycle on ice, do you?

If you’re not familiar with the concept of inherent risk you probably will be soon. It’s a movement that appears to be spreading state to state, and it will affect motorcycle riders.

Essentially, inherent risk is a recognition that some things people like to do carry some amount of risk. The current crop of laws being passed regarding inherent risk made a clear statement that if people choose to engage in these activities they do so recognizing the risks and accepting those risks. That is, if you do it and get hurt, it’s on you. Don’t try to sue someone else for your misfortune.

The first thing you might think of in this category could be motorcycle racing, but that’s really not the case. Racers uniformly are required to sign waivers stating they will not sue the track if they screw up and get hurt. Of course this is only true if the track is in good shape and the crash was the rider’s fault, or perhaps the fault of another racer. If there is a big pothole in the middle of a tough turn then the track is at fault. But how often is a track going to allow that hazard to exist?

The legislation is aimed more at places such as an open space area where the governmental entity that owns or controls it allows dirt bike riding. Or a farmer who lets local kids ride in his pasture. If you get hurt, don’t go suing the nice person who let you ride in his pasture. He didn’t cause your crash, you did.

So far Arkansas and Texas have enacted inherent risk legislation. The concept is supported by the American Motorcyclist Association, which put out a report that stated, “The American Motorcyclist Association, alongside Texas motocross track owners, motorcycle dealers, and riding enthusiasts, was closely engaged with efforts to pass HB 5624. The AMA commends the Texas state legislature for its passage, as HB 5624 aims to create a more consistent and predictable liability environment for property owners and off-road riding enthusiasts.”

The AMA also noted, “This form of legislation has picked up steam across the country, and the AMA is focused on additional efforts, primarily in Iowa and Missouri, where similar inherent risk bills are taking shape for re-introduction in each state’s next legislative session.”

Everyone knows the story of the woman who bought coffee at McDonald’s from a drive-up window, put the coffee between her legs, and then spilled it, burning herself. She sued McDonald’s and won. That would seem to fall under this policy. You bought the hot coffee and would have been unhappy if it had been cold. Nobody forced you to put it between your legs as you drove away.

I think we can all expect these laws to come to our own states. Look for them.

Biker Quote for Today

My comments to my neighbor who rides horses but thinks motorcycles are dangerous – “I’m not riding anything that has a mind of its own . . .” — markbxr400

Me on my only remaining bike, my V-Strom 650.

We just got back from the neurosurgeon’s and I am free to resume all activities. Yahoo!

Now I’m going riding. I’ll tell you all about it on Thursday.

Biker Quote for Today

You might be a Yuppie biker if your jeans have a crease.

My 1980 Honda CB750 Custom before its front end got smashed.

In the last three days, and in another four, three events have occurred/will occur that should effectively close the book on my crash with a drunk driver. On Monday I finally got the police report of the crash, and Monday of next week I will see my neurosurgeon presumably for the last time and will be free to resume my life in full. And then yesterday I got a report from the Arapahoe County DA on the sentencing of the guy who ran into me. The case is wrapped, and soon my recovery will officially be at an end. Finally.

I had wondered about the sentencing. I knew there had been a hearing at which the judge had rejected the DA’s proposed plea bargain and instead insisted on harsher punishment. I actually had it on my to-do list yesterday to email the person in the DA’s office who I have been in contact with to ask about the sentencing and then there it was in yesterday’s mail.

The recap is that he was sentenced to 24 months of probation, separate on two counts but presumably to be served concurrently, plus 48 hours of community service. Between a long list of fines and assessments he will also have to pay a total of $2,835.50. This list is pretty interesting. If you, like me, have never been on the defense side of a court case you may find this a bit of a surprise. I’m not at all sure what some of these mean. Leaf fine?

Count 2, Driving Under the Influence Per Se (misdemeanor)
$78 — Victim Compensation Fine
$10 — Restorative Justice Charge
$25 — Public Defender Appl Receivable
$25 — Request for Time to Pay
$2.50 — Genetic Testing Service Charge
$90 — Leaf Fine
$200 — Alcohol Evaluation Fee
$25 — Traumatic Brain Injury Fund
$1200 — Probation – Supervision Fee
$5 — Court Security Cash Fund
$35 — Court Costs Prior to 6/6/03
$5 — Rural Youth Alcohol/Substance Abuse Surcharge
$100 — Persistent Drunk Driving Surcharge
$600 — Drive Under Influence/Ability Impaired
$222 — Victim Assistance 37% Fine 050103
$2 — Sub Aff.Driving Data Surcharge

Count 6, Vehicular Assault-Reckless (Level 5 felony)
$163 — Victim Assistance 37% Fine 050103

From here, the DA’s office will keep me informed of the progress of this fellow’s probation and alcohol treatment program. That is, they tell me, the only thing to be reported will be if he fails them along the way, plus the fact he has successfully completed them if he does. I’m hoping he does. On the whole, I’d say he came out of this a lot worse off than I did, but it will really be a good thing for him if this helps him beat that monkey that has been on his back. And our roads will be safer.

Now at last I’m going to be able to ride again and I can get back to my main focus, writing about riding motorcycles. I’m really looking forward to that.

Biker Quote for Today

100 reasons not to date a biker: 28. If another bike or car wants to race, you better hold on.

This sketch of the crash was in the LPD report. That red car you see three times represents the guy who hit me and his trajectory.

Who knew it takes months before the police report of a crash is available to be seen? Following the incident on June 29 when I was hit head-on by a drunk driver while on my old Honda CB750 I quickly filed to receive notice when the report became available. I received that notification today, four months later.

My primary interest in seeing the report was because I have almost no recollection of the event and I wanted some detail. Now, after all this time, I really only got two details that I didn’t already have. I was unsure as to where the guy was coming from. Was he heading east on Belleview and just drifted over into the oncoming lane (where I was) or had he just gotten off Santa Fe and was turning east onto Belleview and turned a bit too sharply? It turns out he was heading east on Belleview. Also, the police estimate he was going 35 mph.

The DA had told me he moved into my lane because he thought, in his drunkenness, that it was a lane open to him. To hit me he had to first take out a sign telling him to stay to the right and then his right wheels had to bounce over a concrete median that rises about 18 inches above the road. That impediment was probably responsible for slowing him down enough that his impact with me was considerably lessened from what it might have been if he had struck me unimpeded. Thank you very much median.

What I had hoped the report would tell me, but didn’t, was what happened to me. Did I go flying off the bike? How far? How did I hit the ground? What was my state immediately after? Was I unconscious? Was I alert? Did I immediately sit up and try to get up?

None of that information is included in the report. Dang. I wonder if the ambulance crew filed a report that might have that sort of information. I do know there was a witness who told the police what he or she saw. That’s the person I’d really like to talk to. And if there had been a trial I’m sure that witness would have been called. But there was no trial, just a plea bargain.

I’ll probably never get answers. Oh well. At this point I’m just focused on the future. One week from today it will be 12 weeks since surgery and presumably I’ll get my life back and be able to drive and to ride my one remaining motorcycle. That meeting with the neurosurgeon will be in the morning and unless the weather is terrible I’m going to be out riding that afternoon. Yahoo!

Biker Quote for Today

You might be a Yuppie biker if you think fringe is a mandatory accessory on your leathers.

Coming down past the Flaming Gorge.

I ran across an article with a catchy, poetic/symbolic header: Street, motorcycle: a motorcyclist is 70 times more likely to die than a motorist and science says so.

OK, that’s the sort of thing to catch your attention. I had to read it.

It’s not an anti-motorcycle piece; the writer acknowledges all the issues we who ride are intimately familiar with. It just lays out the statistics from the study, which was done at Northwestern University. (A chuckle: the piece is British and the writer mistakenly refers to the school as the University of Northwestern.) Although it does use some wording that you and I might take issue with. I’ll quote part of the article.

Parents have always told their children that motorcycles are dangerous. And for once, statistics prove them right. A large study conducted by the University of Northwestern in the United States has just demonstrated it: driving a motorcycle is 29 times riskier than driving a car, for the same distance traveled.

Also:

The study drew on 1,6 billion kilometers traveled to estimate the risks associated with each mode of transport. The verdict is clear: motorcycles cause 212 deaths, dwarfing all other modes of transport. Bicycles come in a distant second (44,6 deaths), followed by cars (7,28). In contrast, airplanes only have 0,07 deaths – 3,000 times safer!

That last one is one of those points where we would question the wording. I mean, “motorcycles cause 212 deaths.” No, I’m sorry, the motorcycles don’t cause those deaths. In fact, usually, it is the total opposite–the deaths are caused by drivers of other vehicles. This is where an editor was needed to revise that statement to something along the lines of “212 motorcyclists died.”

Discussing the study, the writer noted, “Far from wanting to demonize motorcycles, this study puts things into perspective. Motorcycle riding isn’t a crime; it’s a choice. But a choice that requires rigor, humility, and lucidity.” He then added that training and awareness of the risks is all important. I don’t think any of us would contest that.

So where does that leave us? Oh, pretty much where we were. We know we take risks and apparently we’re OK with that. Next.

Biker Quote for Today

Getting a motorcycle right after my divorce didn’t make me a walking cliché. It made me a much faster cliché.