May stands for Motorcycle Mindfulness

Finally, an assignment I can't speak from first-hand experiences and really from the heart. Usually it takes me some time to find an article or blog I feel I can write enough about. This time, I found two! Let me begin with giving some background information to credit my point of view. I have been riding motorcycles on public roads now for a year. I have laid my bike down a few times as well. "Laying a bike down" puts the focus on the vehicle, not the rider. Jackets, gloves and helmets can protect you from road rash and save your life, but there is still the impact with hitting the ground or a vehicle with your body that cannot be ignored. Debris in the road, roadkill, litter, cracks, potholes, etc are potentially fatal to a motorcyclist. When you get a small fender bender in the parking lot and mindlessly, carelessly don't clean up the black plastic that looks like road tar and a motorcyclist drives over it turning out of a Walmart parking lot, the front wheel rides on that plastic like a ski, and the rider goes down. I know from experience. Motorcyclists are watching for so much more than just other cars. Constantly checking for clearances, distracted drivers, potentially dangerous situations, obstacles in the road etc that most automobile drivers don't think twice about because it isn't thought of as, as life threatening.



Geneva wrote a blog "Critiquing:Motorcyclists and safety" commenting on A.Jones' blog "Motorcyclists and Safety". I must say, some of the views in the former blog are a bit skewed. See, I am one of those motorcyclists you think are reckless, but I witness all the reckless driving firsthand more so than yourself. I ride next to drivers and can see into their vehicles. I witness people eating bowls of soup, tacos which basically disassemble themselves while being consumed, hamburgers etc while driving. Eating while driving is distracting. The term "distracted driving" refers to anything that takes your eyes, hands or mind away from driving. Eating while driving is one of the most distracting things you can do, according to several surveys by insurance companies and data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Tell me you, have never eaten food while driving? I have. I've witnessed drivers constantly, texting while driving. Which is not only distracting but unlawful in Austin. These drivers I wish to avoid.

Personally, I would rather have motorists behind me, where they can see me. I do speed, and rather frequently, but I'd rather be in front than on the side or behind a motorists where they cannot see me. Turning your head to check lane clearance is just good practice. Cars have blind spots and some are larger than others. It took me one scare to not ride next to a car again. People don't often check their blind spots, and I don't want my fate, my life to be in the hands of someone else's carelessness. It's called defensive driving, and it's understood more so by motorcyclists. As for speeding being reckless, I say it's a lot safer than riding next to the woman eating tacos on her drive back from her shortened lunch break due to traffic or the business man that can't miss another sick day eating a bowl of soup on his way to work. These sound like brash examples, but I've seen it. Lane splitting is against the law, but between stopped vehicles, being between two cars is the safest. These measures are actually taught in the motorcycle driving course. If someone's brakes go out or doesn't judge a distance and ends up rear ending a driver, being between the automobiles where you can potentially escape the accident is much safer. I'd rather not be sandwiched between two heavy pieces of machinery. Again, this is all defensive driving which is taught in the class. Popping wheelies is reckless. I agree with you on that. I think perhaps your perspective on motorcyclists may be a bit influenced by those that are reckless and that ride without protection.



As far as A.Jones' blog goes, there should be more motorcycle safety promotion. A lot of drivers are not aware of the risks that motorcyclists take. There are a lot more things to be aware of. Drunk riding accounts for href="http://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/Alcohol_Awareness.pdf"46% of fatal motorcycle crashes. Motorcycle safety promotions need to go for both drivers. Many people aren't as mindful for other motorists as they should be and motorcyclists are at the top of the list for accidents involving serious injury. Motorcycle awareness promotion is very important. Dedicating a month to it is not meaningless. There are months dedicated to other things so dedicating a month to promote awareness I think is potentially life saving, potentially saving my life, and therefore I think it is important. The statement, helmets save lives is wrong. Helmets CAN save lives. Personally, I never ride without a helmet, but any knowing adult knows that it's wiser to ride with than without a helmet. There are already laws about helmets and mandating the use of them. Any rider, under 18 is required to have a helmet, and any passenger on the bike is also required. I don't agree with riding without a helmet but everyone knows, fatal accidents are less likely with a helmet. It should remain a choice.





At the end of this video it reads "What do we have to do to get noticed?"

Texas decides things may be too slow of pace

A bill was introduced in early April proposing some speed limits across the state of Texas to be raised to 80-85 miles per hour. House Bill 1353 doesn’t actually state that the speed limits would be raised to speeds in excess of 75 miles per hour, but what it does say is that many roads once deemed fit by studies, would be raised to 75 and perhaps even further.

Raising speed limits seems like an acceptable bill by many motorists driving in Texas. It seems like a bill that would be easily passed. Many other states in the United States already have speed limits set higher than 70. The speed change from sun up to nightfall is probably the biggest objection most motorists have. When does the speed limit actually drop? At what time do motorists pay attention to the black-with-white-lettered speed limit signs instead of the white signs? When can truckers speed back up to 70 in the morning? If there was one set speed limit, these confusions could be resolved. Certainly there have been some civil cases against the state of Texas regarding these changes and tickets issued. Texas is a fairly flat state. Many stretches of roads are long, flat and have clear visibility. Lowered speed limits seem like a hindrance. Numerous roads in Europe have high speed limits already set. Only 13 states in the United States allow speeds up to 75 mph on rural interstates. Allowing higher speeds in Texas would potentially ease the congestion of traffic, as well as allow motorists to travel through the state faster and residents to commute quicker.

Higher speed limits sound great to most but with the higher speeds comes higher rates of injuries and death. Most accidents occur at high speeds or are involved with alcohol. Because of this, House Bill 1353 may get rejected. Granted, 13 other states have speed limits set up to 75 mph and many others don’t have the night-day limitations. 80 miles per hour seems like a high speed limit to be set, and it is. No other state has this speed limit, and no other state has a limit set any higher. Should Texas be the first? No, Texas does not need to be the example for high mortality rates because of the liberal attitudes towards speed limits. If deaths can be avoided, the measures to do so should be taken, or not taken to fix what isn’t broke. Speed limits restricted to the solar cycle should however be changed. They’re a hassle. There is not an exact time every day when the speed drops. Releasing the night speed restrictions would alleviate a lot of frustrations and disputable tickets. Texas residents should be happy with any increase they can get. Oklahoma, which is an abolished word amongst many Texans, has a 75mph speed limit and no special night restrictions. Texas is in fact the only state that does have a night restriction. Why then, does Texas still have this restriction? There cannot be more wildlife crossing interstates in Texas than there are in the more rural northwestern states? 49 out of 50 can’t be wrong?

Raising speed limits to 80+mph I don’t agree with. There are limits on a lot of things. Medications have dosage limits to protect society. Speed limits are set to protect society just as well. An increased speed limit would be nice, but the loss of a night speed limit would be totally acceptable and could be backed by studies from other states. Texas, lose the limit.

Re: New Texas Immigration Law

In regards to Angie's blog post, New Texas Immigration Law, I can't say that I fully agree. What the Legislature is doing is weighing out the options they have in front of them. Not every decision made and passed by Legislature can be argued as the "correct" solution. Just as well, there are certain things that cannot be resolved all-together; illegal immigration being one of them.

Illegal immigration has been a problem in Texas, Arizon, California, and New Mexico because these states do lie on the border of the United States and Mexico. Border control was hired to lessen the amount of "border hoppers" but obviously, there are still illegal aliens fleeing to the U.S. Efforts have been made to take these aliens that have been taking jobs from legal U.S. citizens, which I agree with. These illegal aliens do not need to be taking jobs from American citizens. There are already a short amount jobs available to those that have had their jobs cut or have been laid off. Illegal aliens should not be able to hold jobs in the United States.

On the opposite side, and perhaps in defense of the state Legislature's actions, if "we", the people, know that illegal immigrants are going to continue sneaking across the border, maybe giving them an option of work could be beneficial. Perhaps giving them some sort of means of income could keep crime down? Sure there is money/jobs to be lost to the immigrants coming from Mexico, but have you ever wondered how much money is spent taking them back to Mexico? I'm not suggesting giving up entirely but trying to keep illegal aliens out of the country is a task the United States is failing at when only one out of every three is caught. Spending more money on border control could also be an alternative, but I think you and I would both agree that we'd rather have more jobs for legal American citizens than keeping illegal aliens out of the country.

Hiring an illegal immigrant to take care of your housework for low wages may seem like slavery, but as a country, slavery is behind us. Just because someone works for very low wages doesn't necessarily mean that the employer would take on the mentality of "I own you" or "you are my property". A lot of times, these nannies or maids become like part of the family. They are offered room and board and actually take care of the family as if they were an aunt or another family member. There are bonds built because of these interactions. People are respectable. I don't think you should assume the worst in people right off the bat. Legislature didn't say it was acceptable to hire these immigrants as editors, general managers, firemen etc. They are simply trying to give them an opportunity to provide for themselves.

Illegal immigrants are just that; illegal. There shouldn't be any sympathy for those that have snuck over and have taught themselves English, studied and taken on the views and values of Americans. They are still illegal. What you may be suggesting is that once an illegal immigrant has been sleeping in the states for so long that they should be granted citizenship and then legally allowed to take over the jobs legal American citizens have the right to work, have the right to be paid for. I disagree.

Lastly, this bill would benefit one group of people mainly and one group of people only, the illegal immigrants. It is granting them the ability to work legally in the states and not fear being deported. The wealthy may be the only ones that could afford a full time hand around the house however, not every wealthy person is going to need or hire this extra helping hand. Your assumption that the wealthy use house workers, maids, nannies, etc. is also suggesting that only the wealthy can afford this kind of labor around the house. If an illegal immigrant were given one of these "around the house" jobs, would they be paid the legal minimum wage?

I agree, illegal aliens should not be allowed to take the jobs legal, law abiding citizens need and are granted to. At the same time, I don't see the issue of the growing numbers of illegal aliens declining either. It's like a problem that cannot be fixed but should be worked around so that it doesn't impact the rest of the population in a severe way. Legislature is trying to do just that.

Pressure Makes Diamonds

That might be the idea some representatives in the house had in their heads this week as they finally decided on a bill to pass onto the senate. With five months left in the fiscal year, the house of representatives passed a bill onto the senate to allow the state to coast along and survive the fiscal year with a balanced budget. With such a large budget to cut and shot over so far, how could this not have been seen earlier, and how come it could not be handled quicker? It's as if the House knew decisions had to be made and were dragging their heels on the subject matter. Of course, twenty three billion dollars is no easy feat to try and cut corners, save some nickels and lay off hundreds of state workers. Even though the House of representatives have decided on a bill, HB4, that does not mean that it's taken care of. The bill is now sent on to the Senate to go under more debate. The Senate has some different options on how much to spend, a good extra 10 billion dollars. Also, the Senate isn't as opposed to tapping into the Rainy Day Fund that the republicans in the house were so quickly to oppose as well when the democrats proposed the idea. The senate will now decide how this bill they want to change if at all. They've already been working up their own version of the same bill, cutting state funded revenues to many state institutions, education, etc. Once the senate has their version revised, again the house of representatives will get their prompt, diligent hands on it. How long can we draw out a 23 billion dollar, time-sensitive matter? This budget deficit can easily be compared to a disease, a virus, if you would have gotten it checked out, treated early, you could have saved yourself a lot of pain. Again, this is a 23 billion dollar matter. I don't expect something of this magnitude to be resolved over a luncheon, but if you know you have so many more steps before the bill can be passed, punch the clock and get to work. Newspapers have to get the news printed by a certain time in the morning, the U.S. Postal Service has to work within time constraints, even the pizza boy has to have your hot pie at your doorstep within thirty minutes, why then, are politicians exempt?

Hindsight's 20/10

This year’s festivities again brought thousands to the downtown scene to experience march’s festivities. Along with the crowds, brought congestion, riots, overflowed traffic into residential areas, damaged property, large amounts of trash, outbreaks, and an overall poorly controlled chaos. The writer of this article is correct in saying that the amount of employed enforcement authorities were on the lacking side this year. Something as great as SXSW is going to gain in attendance each preceding year. For example, take a look at the Sturgis motorcycle rally in South Dakota. Every year more and more people attend. Throw some alcohol in the mix with a bunch of partiers and incidences are bound to happen.
This was my first year to attend SXSW, and I too observed the difficulty EMS and other officials would have in getting to sites of emergency. It’s very poor foresight on the City of Austin’s planning the festivities. Riverside could be best described as a parking lot, with the only traffic actually crawling along being outbound. How can this be corrected in the future? It seems a bit ridiculous to suggest road or lane closures for emergency vehicles but what sort of lawsuit and damage could be avoided if the emergency personnel were able to travel throughout downtown. It’s understood there’s a bit of laxness during SXSW, open containers overlooked, scents of cannabis wafting through the air, and loud individuals having a good time. However, it shouldn’t take a bad incident to expose the poor preparation. The riot at the Auditorium Shores definitely exposed some flaws in the security.
It’s easy to point out flaws, but the author doesn’t propose any solutions to the problems he/she addressed. It’s easy to see that the author is displeased, which is understandable, with the events that occurred this year downtown but suggests little to fix the problem. Often times rules and laws are made because of an incident to prevent further incidents, but this sort of behavior, reactions by the crowd and outnumbered police festivities isn’t a first. Sturgis, Woodstock, Mardi Gras, etc. could have been examined and this year’s SXSW could have taken a different turn. Also, planning officials and councils could have taken a look at the attendance years past and noticed a trend in growth and could have estimated the attendance and planned accordingly. It’s unfortunate this years events and the lack of preparation for the “March Madness”, but lessons learned in hindsight can be costly and should be avoided.

You can read the article from the Austin Statesman here.

Budgets cuts will be hard enough without the bickering

This article is basically stating that there is some quarrelling between texas officials and debating how to react to the almost certain impending budget cuts due to overspending in recent years.  The board trustees agree that something has got to be done but this article makes these trustees seem as if they’re too timid to make any concrete decisions.  School board officials need to know what they will be required to do, and what they will be required to do quickly.  Because the fiscal year for teachers begins in July, board members need to know what kind of numbers they will be faced with. 

The meeting with Fort Worth school trustees has everyone fearing for their jobs because they know the positions cuts are probably first on the list.  Trustees asked for more information on potential cuts before moving closer to a resolution. When a member of the administration claimed that there was a list but board members didn’t know about it, superintendent Melody Johnson claimed there was no such list in existence, however schools in the Fort Worth area have asked their teachers to inform employers if they had planned retirement soon or quitting their job so as to protect other employees from blindly axing their positions.  This situation seems like everyone but the board members and trustees know what is impending. 

This article makes it clear that a decision to resolve the budget cuts is urgent, but makes the activists in this decision making out to look dumbfounded by the posed problem and a solution.  There are obvious labor-force downsizing propositions but trustees are trying to look at all the options before deciding on a resolution.  It is as if, recognizing the answer but not wanting to face the consequences.  This article also makes it seem as if there has been little brainstorming done.  The trustees finished their meeting, agreeing that this was an urgent topic to resolve, deciding to come to a conclusion “next time”.  This attitude and manner of resolving a problem I’m rather familiar with, it's called procrastination.  

Star-Telegram.    Budget cuts will be hard enough without the bickering

Watson files a bill concerning cellular data messages

Friday, February 11th, 2011, Senator Kirk Watson filed a bill concerning the offense of sexting.  "Sexting" is a term used to describe the sending of sexual explicit and/or provocative messages/pictures. The bill would make sending explicit material over a cellular device a crime for minors and make awareness of this crime by implementing education programs.  Since there are few prosecutions already on the subject matter, it's difficult to tell whether there is a real need for the legislation however,with the new law, sexting would be considered a class C crime consisting of a fine for first time offenders and a class A misdemeanor for third-time offenders involving up to a year punishable in jail.  Watson believes that passing this bill would make "sexting" be perceived as a more serious matter and would make recipients of sexts punishable for not filing a report within 48 hours of the incident.

The Austin Chronicle. Bill of the Week. http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2011-02-11/bill-of-the-week/  February 11, 2011.