I just took action on this issue and thought you might too.
Click on this URL to take action now
http://capwiz.com/amacycle/ (http://capwiz.com/amacycle/)
done
thanks, Howie.
Done.
I don't see the point. No agency is going to set up a checkpoint for helmet usage. You see them, you pull them over. And motos already get stopped in DUI checkpoints, this bill won't change that.
"To prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from providing
grants or any funds to a State, county, town, or township,
Indian tribe, municipal or other local government
to be used for any program to check helmet usage or
create checkpoints for a motorcycle driver or passenger"
Quote from: hbliam on March 07, 2011, 08:25:46 AM
I don't see the point. No agency is going to set up a checkpoint for helmet usage. You see them, you pull them over. And motos already get stopped in DUI checkpoints, this bill won't change that.
It's not restricted to checkpoints for helmets. It prevents funding for any checkpoint specifically targeting motorcycles as opposed to all motorists.
The the bill is directed at NY's motorcycle-only checkpoints, an issue currently being litigated in federal district court in NY, Northern District (Wagner et. al v. County of Schenectady). The Supreme Court has said that DUI checkpoints are ok w/ the 4th Amendment's search and seizure clause, in part because of the serious and widespread problem of drunk driving. As far as I can tell, there's no analogous reason for motorcycle specific checkpoints. The NY program is aimed at safety and equipment violations and stolen motorcycles.
And the reason to target federal funding specifically is that the NY motocycle-specific checkpoints are funded in part by a federal NTSA grant, and there is federal money target for Georgia for moto checkpoints.
Quote from: hbliam on March 07, 2011, 08:25:46 AM
I don't see the point. No agency is going to set up a checkpoint for helmet usage. You see them, you pull them over. And motos already get stopped in DUI checkpoints, this bill won't change that.
last year, after the miller worldsbk races, there was a motorcycle-only checkpoint setup on the main road back from the track.
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=40649 (http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=40649)
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?lnk=rss&article=40778 (http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?lnk=rss&article=40778)
Already done!
Quote from: Spidey on March 07, 2011, 10:24:47 AM
The the bill is directed at NY's motorcycle-only checkpoints, an issue currently being litigated in federal district court in NY, Northern District (Wagner et. al v. County of Schenectady). The Supreme Court has said that DUI checkpoints are ok w/ the 4th Amendment's search and seizure clause, in part because of the serious and widespread problem of drunk driving. As far as I can tell, there's no analogous reason for motorcycle specific checkpoints. The NY program is aimed at safety and equipment violations and stolen motorcycles.
And the reason to target federal funding specifically is that the NY motocycle-specific checkpoints are funded in part by a federal NTSA grant, and there is federal money target for Georgia for moto checkpoints.
Didn't know NY had the time to do that. That being said, this bill only prohibits them from using grants or funds from the feds. The specific agency can still use their own funds or defer fed funds to other programs and use those now free'd up funds to do the same thing.
I agree that the DUI checkpoints are about as far as we should go in bending the 4th amendment. We should probably just divert those checkpoints funds and use them for saturation patrols instead. A 6 hour checkpoint manned by a dozen officers will yield zero to four DUI's in my experience. I can find two or three just driving around by myself for 2-3 hours on any fri/sat night.
Quote from: Spidey on March 07, 2011, 10:24:47 AM
The the bill is directed at NY's motorcycle-only checkpoints, an issue currently being litigated in federal district court in NY, Northern District (Wagner et. al v. County of Schenectady). The Supreme Court has said that DUI checkpoints are ok w/ the 4th Amendment's search and seizure clause, in part because of the serious and widespread problem of drunk driving. As far as I can tell, there's no analogous reason for motorcycle specific checkpoints. The NY program is aimed at safety and equipment violations and stolen motorcycles.
And the reason to target federal funding specifically is that the NY motocycle-specific checkpoints are funded in part by a federal NTSA grant, and there is federal money target for Georgia for moto checkpoints.
Zakly!! I didn't know the suit garnered interstate fame.
And what happens here can happen anywhere.
i think people posted on here that nyc was doing motorcycle only checkpoints as a way to crack down on aftermarket and loud pipes, they wouldn't stop any other vehicles such as sanitation vehicles that made excessive noise only motorcycles thus the descrimination part when they said "its for noise compliance" when other vehicles were not checked for that.
it was basically a harrassment thing as many nyc riders know that the city really does not want motorcycles in manhattan and the motorcycle only checkpoints were a way to discourage that without making it look too descriminatory since most people don't care if motorcyclists are harrasssed.
Done
Quote from: hbliam on March 07, 2011, 11:43:22 AM
Didn't know NY had the time to do that. That being said, this bill only prohibits them from using grants or funds from the feds. The specific agency can still use their own funds or defer fed funds to other programs and use those now free'd up funds to do the same thing.
I agree that the DUI checkpoints are about as far as we should go in bending the 4th amendment. We should probably just divert those checkpoints funds and use them for saturation patrols instead. A 6 hour checkpoint manned by a dozen officers will yield zero to four DUI's in my experience. I can find two or three just driving around by myself for 2-3 hours on any fri/sat night.
If the agency had to pay for the stops I think you are correct, but if Federal money pays for it the profit margin changes.
Quote from: sbrguy on March 07, 2011, 01:13:50 PM
i think people posted on here that nyc was doing motorcycle only checkpoints as a way to crack down on aftermarket and loud pipes, they wouldn't stop any other vehicles such as sanitation vehicles that made excessive noise only motorcycles thus the descrimination part when they said "its for noise compliance" when other vehicles were not checked for that.
it was basically a harrassment thing as many nyc riders know that the city really does not want motorcycles in manhattan and the motorcycle only checkpoints were a way to discourage that without making it look too descriminatory since most people don't care if motorcyclists are harrasssed.
The suit is about the State Police check points on the way to hooligan events like Americade. If the suit is won it would cover NYC.NYC has had its own check points. If you don't have any of your paperwork with you, your bike is impounded. Keep in mind, a computer check will show if you are legally licensed and registered
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 07, 2011, 11:24:07 AM
+1 to that....
1) In NY it is not uncommon for checkpoints to spring up that pull over ONLY motorcycles regardless of how they look or how loud they are and try to find a ticket to give us.
2) This bill helps to address these checkpoints that profile motorcycles.
3) If it is allowed to continue other states could see the revenue in it and also do it.
How would you feel getting pulled over for no reason and given a ticket for not having a visor down or something ridiculous? Or as Howie said getting your bike impounded for forgetting your paperwork at home?!
It is profiling plain and simple! How could you not be against this!
Quote from: rideserotta on March 07, 2011, 04:05:44 PM
+2
How about you all elaborate what you don't see the point about instead of just writing +1s and +2s? Because if you go by the original quote and you read the next posts you would see it has nothing to do with helmets. There are motorcycle only checkpoints in NY, what if they had car checkpoints just for driving your car?
Help us educate you on this so maybe you can all understand the seriousness of this issue in NY.
this is pretty important stuff to how we go about our daily lives.
For federal money to go to states for these things that cause these stops to be primary offenses is an issue; that means it's valid stops for secondaries that otherwise would require you doing something stupid to get pulled....
example: you may not be able to be cited for your aftermarket pipes as a reason to pull you over, but you might be able to be cited for them if you got stopped for speeding.
one of these bike checkpoints, if considered a primary, could mean going over you and your bike for secondaries automatically, no probable cause required.
Anyone who thinks "ah...what's the point" needs to know all the details of this.
THAT's what the AMA letters ask/ point out.
I'd also like to know what the "+1" guys mean.
happy to stop and be inspected while all the cars go by simply because you ride? That's what you're saying is ok for fed $ to go to with your "+1 no big deal". (and if the feds aren't paying, it's not going to happen... just like my area of law).
Quote from: Statler on March 07, 2011, 05:10:45 PM
happy to stop and be inspected while all the cars go by simply because you ride? That's what you're saying is ok for fed $ to go to with your "+1 no big deal". (and if the feds aren't paying, it's not going to happen... just like my area of law).
Our agency, and most around us, have portions of our regular budget earmarked for certain types of enforcement. We don't do moto checkpoints but we do other types of checkpoints/saturation patrol (DUI, seat belts, cell phones). Sometimes with grant money, sometimes with City money. That's my point. If the agency wants to do a certain type of checkpoint they will. They will just shift grant money to an approved assignment and use the savings from that assignment to pay for the checkpoint they want to do. What's "going to happen" is whatever the command staff, mayor, and Council believe is an effective use of their agencies time on whatever they construe to be a "problem."
Lastly, in CA, probably 100% of the grant money we get for these type of checkpoints comes from the State, not the feds. The feds give us money to hire more cops and buy equipment.
Right. But as you've said most local places aren't prioritizing bike checks. Grant money can and does change that.
Sure this doesn't stop a local dept from doing this, just stops Feds from funding it.
Locals doing it with local $ can be lobbied/approached at that level.
I know this gets into the politics/police side of things, and I'm trying to keep it as neutral as possible...
For me it falls into the same realm as when I'm riding along, doing say 5 over, and other cars are passing me doing 10-15 over... yet because of the motorcycle I'm the one pulled over and ticketed. Yup, I was caught, so I don't complain about it and pay the fine, but it bothers me that being on a motorcycle makes you more guilty by default. Hell, I was pulled over one time on a busy street because I was riding in the inside lane on a 4-lane street. [bang]
On the other hand, pulling over every motorcyclist because they are on a motorcycle is blatant discrimination against a certain segment of the population. No different than if every mustang / camaro driver was pulled over at a musclecar checkpoint to check for cracked windshields and aftermarket exhaust. It's flat out wrong.
I made an announcement on my PA the other night, "Motorcycle. When it's clear you can go." He was sitting at a red light he couldn't activate. I made the cars wait. I guess discrimination goes both ways. :)
Quote from: hbliam on March 07, 2011, 06:57:32 PM
I made an announcement on my PA the other night, "Motorcycle. When it's clear you can go." He was sitting at a red light he couldn't activate. I made the cars wait. I guess discrimination goes both ways. :)
See not all
cops motorcyclists are jackasses... it just so happens that a certain segment of the
law enforcement motorcycling community gives the rest a bad name.... [cheeky]
Well said, Punx.. It's all about the money, so much for Freedom in America, no matter what the cost, Nuff Said...
Done.
Whatever happened to the " Land of the FREE and the brave ?
FREE was suppose to have meant something when the Fore Fathers said it !
Dolph
let's try to keep this focussed on motorcycles, ok?
Quote from: GLantern on March 07, 2011, 04:49:03 PM
How about you all elaborate what you don't see the point about instead of just writing +1s and +2s?
That's true and in turn, I'd say that after perusing the link, I just found myself a little confused about the relevance of a policy that targets motorcyclists. I didn't have the time to dig into the finer points and since we have nothing like that here in AZ, it just confused me and left me wondering what the point was of it.
I agree that I have no problem being pulled over for a
legitimate reason, but to purposely and specifically target a motorcyclist and not other vehicles at the same time is vehicular discrimination. ...something that I think many people around here would be (literally) up in arms about.
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 08, 2011, 07:38:25 AM
That's true and in turn, I'd say that after perusing the link, I just found myself a little confused about the relevance of a policy that targets motorcyclists.
money. A lot of squids in this area. A lot of them either dont have motorcycle license or only have a permit (fine + impound), if you dont have documents on you, which a lot of squids do not have (fine + impound). And if you have a single thing wrong (they will walk around your bike looking for things to give you tickets for) they will write you up for up to 3 tickets at a time. They will give you a ticket for something that isnt even illegal because most people will not take the time to fight it.
Its all about money money money, and targeting bikes is easy because chances are you are going to come up with something.
Litterally.... No right hand mirror, no windscreen, no fairing, no fender, visor flipped up....IN TRAFFIC (even if u are wearing these mysterious non existent DOT approved googles). etc the lit goes on.
money money money money money
Quote from: Monster Dave on March 08, 2011, 07:38:25 AM
That's true and in turn, I'd say that after perusing the link, I just found myself a little confused about the relevance of a policy that targets motorcyclists. I didn't have the time to dig into the finer points and since we have nothing like that here in AZ, it just confused me and left me wondering what the point was of it.
I agree that I have no problem being pulled over for a legitimate reason, but to purposely and specifically target a motorcyclist and not other vehicles at the same time is vehicular discrimination. ...something that I think many people around here would be (literally) up in arms about.
As HeMan quoted they do it for the money I wish they didn't but they do. And that is what we are trying to fight here. Thank you for clearing up your stance. As I understand now you didn't see the point in motorcycle only checkpoints and that was all. I thought you didn't see the point in protesting against them at first.
I don't believe a manned checkpoint for motorcycle-only stops would be a money maker. Please back up that one with some references.
Quote from: Statler on March 08, 2011, 11:03:23 AM
I don't believe a manned checkpoint for motorcycle-only stops would be a money maker. Please back up that one with some references.
If the agency had to pay for the stops I think you are correct, but if Federal money pays for it the profit margin changes. NYC's checks profitable? I don't know, but less man power and equipement is used. Many of the check points are coming off a bridge into traffic so a big corral area and chase vehicles are not needed.
I doubt the county of Schenectady could finance the overtime, chase vehicles and aircraft used in these check points with the money earned
from the tickets issued. NYC's checks profitable? I don't know, but less man power and equipement is used. Many of the check points are coming off a bridge into traffic so a big corral area and chase vehicles are not needed.
I don't know how much the State check point cost to finance, but, according to Strickland from NHTSA at one check point 225 motorcycles were inspected. Allegedly 11% had unsafe tires, 1% illegal handebars and 36% of the riders were not wearing helmets meeting New York State regulations. I would have to the law suit info to confirm, but 70 pages of legal brief and 2 CDs of exhibit is a lot of stuff for a non lawer like me to try and go through without pulling my hair out.
Quote from: GLantern on March 08, 2011, 10:33:37 AM
Thank you for clearing up your stance.
Sure, no problem! [thumbsup]
done!
I did it!
I "signed" also.
The profit point for NYC is the fees they get to charge for license, registration, and insurance violations, charges for towing and impounding a motorcycle, releasing the motorcycle from impound, and if you don't come for you bike soon enough, they then auction off you bikes at the Brooklyn lot every other Monday.
I bought my Hawk GT from the Brooklyn lot back in '03 before they started doing the BS checkpoint crap. They started the checkpoint bs in '06, as I remember being on my way to work one morning, passing a biker that was pulled over on Thompson Avenue in Queens, thinking to myself "That's an odd place to pull over a biker", then next thing I know, there are sirens going off behind me.
I pulled over, again in a not very safe spot, had the officer come over and ask for my papers, I handed them over, and asked him what I did. He said I didn't do anything, but he has to check my paper work since I'm riding a bike, and he walked over to his car for several minutes. When he came back, and handed my stuff back to me, he said I'm good to go. I asked him "Why did you pull me over for if I didn't do anything?" His reply was along the lines of they are planning on cracking down on bikers in the city without all their info, and he indicated that under no circumstances should I ever ride without it, anywhere in the 5 Boroughs from now on if I wanted to get where I was going to that day.
It seems that some people are reporting that they have decided to take it to whole new levels, by handing out tickets for opening their visors when they talk to the officers who pull them over, and other levels of unfair tickets. One friend of mine told me that he was pulled over on the BQE, and written a ticket for traveling 35 in a 50 during rush hour traffic, because the officer couldn't write him up for any violations since he kept his visor closed while talking to him, and the bike was factory stock. Impeding the flow of traffic, or some such nonsense. In rush hour traffic.
I really hope they get Bloomberg out of office soon.
I want to visit my old hunting grounds on my toys sometime in the near future when I visit my newborn niece, and tow my bikes across the country.
BC.