Cycle Forums: Motorcycle and Sportbikes Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Sometimes I Think Too Much ...
Joined
·
878 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anybody been following the David Hough articles on problems with the MSF Training Program? Don't know what to make of the January '05 article(s).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,150 Posts
can you link or post the articles?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
dalebowgren said:
Anybody been following the David Hough articles on problems with the MSF Training Program? Don't know what to make of the January '05 article(s).
Dave Hough has an axe to grind with MSF. I think we'd all be better off if he'd just admit it. Then maybe the sheople would stop agreeing with everything he says and think on their own. YMMV...

:msf
 

·
Sometimes I Think Too Much ...
Joined
·
878 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Re: Re: Motorcycle Consumer News Articles on MSF Problems

motorrad said:
Dave Hough has an axe to grind with MSF. I think we'd all be better off if he'd just admit it. Then maybe the sheople would stop agreeing with everything he says and think on their own. YMMV...

:msf
Hough used to teach the RSS, don't think he's been a coach since the BRC came out. What axe to grind?
I'm trying to get the articles up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Dale,

Thanks for the link. Very ineresting articles, although one-sided. Hough tipped his hand with his reference for people to go to www.solriders.com, the self-proclaimed "Sons of Liberty Riders: The Extreme Activists of Motorcyclists' Rights."

This whole debate seems to be between local programs that don't want to come aboard with a better training system and are screaming "states rights" as an excuse not to talk about the basis for their complaint; the curiculum itself.

The "broken system" quote the SMROs like to throw around is taken out of context. I don't have the exact quote, but in testimony to Congress, Tim Buche was referreing to the current funding system for motorcycle training, which taxes only motorcycle riders to support training issues (i.e. our $6.00 fee we pay on bike registration). His point was that if the government was serious about safety training, then they need to find a better way to fund training.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I have heard that David Hough is P.O.'d at MSF because they will not include Trikes and Sidecars to the MSF cirriculum.:confused I don't think of Trikes and Sidecars as Motorcycles. What about ya'll? Plus Ron Sheppard (Idaho) was fired by the MSF so I think I know where that axe is coming from. I don't have proof of anything but the MCN articles didn't seem to have any creditbility either, read Wendy Moon's article in the Sep 2004 issue and tell me how many inacuraccies you find with the US side, I don't know any about the UK side so I can't say anything. But it's omething to think about.

Take Care and RIde Safe..
Lane
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Like I said...

motorrad said:
Dave Hough has an axe to grind with MSF. I think we'd all be better off if he'd just admit it. Then maybe the sheople would stop agreeing with everything he says and think on their own. YMMV...

:msf
 

·
Sometimes I Think Too Much ...
Joined
·
878 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Re: Re: Motorcycle Consumer News Articles on MSF Problems

motorrad said:
Dave Hough has an axe to grind with MSF. I think we'd all be better off if he'd just admit it. Then maybe the sheople would stop agreeing with everything he says and think on their own. YMMV...

:msf
Sorry, I still don't understand what your saying. I have read Hough's articles for years and I think they are helpful for most riders. I don't think that makes me a 'sheople'. In fact this latest set of articles seems like a drastic departure to me. (What does YMMV mean?).
His latest article is at http://mcnews.com/mcn/bulletins/MSFinterview1.pdf

Trikes and Side Cars are a part of the Evergreen Safety Councils' latest curriculum, I think. State of Nevada (nevadarider.com) offers them, even though the state doesn't consider trikes to be motorcycles. I don't think there has been any demand yet, and I don't think any of the coaches have the equipment to teach it. (though my understanding is that the state is going to purchase a hack for that purpose.) Why would Hough be upset about that?

I also don't understand the funding issue. What could be better than the people who want the training, pay for it? 'Free', to me, means everybody pays, whether they directly benefit or not.

Further, it seems to me, that if the MSF doesn't want to support the RSS any further, as in publish books and so on, they should be able to discontinue support. They seem to want to encourage state to adopt the BRC because they think it is better than the RSS. What's wrong with that? Some semblance of uniformity needs to be maintained, in order to insure the integrity of the "cards" & licenses issued. If Idaho (ie) wants to go there own way, who will monitor the integrity of the program. States like Nevada and the military bases have adopted the MSF card as proof of a standard training course. Two years from now, how would we know if the Idaho program has gone to hades, and therefore, no longer meets the standard that our state program promised the state legislature would be met, in order for a citizen to receive a license in Nevada?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Motorcycle Consumer News Articles on MSF Problems

dalebowgren said:
Sorry, I still don't understand what your saying. I have read Hough's articles for years and I think they are helpful for most riders. I don't think that makes me a 'sheople'. In fact this latest set of articles seems like a drastic departure to me. (What does YMMV mean?).
Okay, here I go again: Dave Hough has an axe to grind with MSF. Stop. That's my point. That's my opinion. Sure his articles are useful, as are his books. Nothing spectacular about either of them. However, he often has sniped at MSF and a lot of people agree with him simply because "Dave Hough said so".

YMMV = your mileage may vary. (welcome to the internet.:rolleyes)

dalebowgren said:I also don't understand the funding issue. What could be better than the people who want the training, pay for it? 'Free', to me, means everybody pays, whether they directly benefit or not.

Further, it seems to me, that if the MSF doesn't want to support the RSS any further, as in publish books and so on, they should be able to discontinue support. They seem to want to encourage state to adopt the BRC because they think it is better than the RSS. What's wrong with that? Some semblance of uniformity needs to be maintained, in order to insure the integrity of the "cards" & licenses issued. If Idaho (ie) wants to go there own way, who will monitor the integrity of the program. States like Nevada and the military bases have adopted the MSF card as proof of a standard training course. Two years from now, how would we know if the Idaho program has gone to hades, and therefore, no longer meets the standard that our state program promised the state legislature would be met, in order for a citizen to receive a license in Nevada?
:confused Um, I didn't metioning anything about this. So, I don't know why you're addressing this to me.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top