ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf
JC was trying to make a derogative contrast between AMAers and non-AMAers that are associated with the new parkflier models...It was wrong for him to do so...no way around it. It is wrong to stereotype those enthusiasts...just plane wrong.
LCS-
The derogation went further than that; the contrast as I read it was between AMA clubbers and everybody else. There a lot of lone wolves that belong to AMA and don't belong to clubs, about half the total AMA membership.
AMA has the actuarial data to belie JC's allegation. Half of AMA's insurance payout is for liability incurred by clubs. Obviously that leaves the other half payed out to cover personal liability incurred by all members, clubbers and non-club members. AMA has provided no breakdown of the personal liability payout by club membership or not, but clearly the possible range for the non-club members must be limited to the range of 0 - 50% of the total. I think it is most probably closer to to the lower than the upper bound of that range, on the presumption that clubs are rarely named as solely responsible for injuries by a claimant - more likely these instances also involve claims against individuals.
Abel