FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MRF CALL TO ACTION
For the past several weeks the Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) has been actively working on a multi-tiered strategic initiative to counter the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) program to pressure states into enacting mandatory helmet laws. We are prepared today to launch the program beginning with a Call to Action to our State Motorcycle Rights Organizations (SMROs).
The MRF's Call to Action is to encourage our SMRO partners to send their top lobbying teams to Washington D.C. in late October and early November to visit with their members of Congress to voice opposition to the NTSB's lobbying efforts. It is our position that the NTSB is proposing to directly lobby the states with federal tax money based on poorly-drawn conclusions, using a very narrow scope, and not employing the rigors of research to which they normally hold themselves. This is simply not acceptable to the MRF and our SMRO partners. A clear message was sent by the Senate in the 109th Congress when they voted 69-28 to defeat the Lautenberg Federal Helmet amendment, which would have pressured states into passing mandatory helmet laws, based on the fact that this issue is clearly a State's rights issue. Accordingly, we will be asking members of Congress to write a letter to the NTSB reminding them of this fact.
During these SMRO visits we will also be presenting a bullet point statistical fact sheet developed in conjunction with the MRF Legislative, Motorcycle Safety, and Statistics Committees that clearly shows that the answer to motorcycle safety and reducing fatalities is, in fact, an aggressive approach toward CRASH AVOIDANCE and NOT safer crashing. In addition, we will be educating members of Congress on the many points contained in our Motorcycle Safety Action Plan, pointing out to them that states with the highest reductions in motorcycle fatalities and states with low fatality rates per registered motorcycle are not those with mandatory helmet laws, but rather states that utilize the many tools in the motorcycle safety action plan. Additionally, we will thank many of them for their belief in motorcycle safety shown by the creation of the 2010 motorcycle safety grants and the creation of the Motorcycle Advisory Council in TEA-LU. We will take advantage of this time to inform them as to how these programs are being used effectively.
The second phase of the MRF's strategic initiative involves the MRF holding a press conference in the first week of November in one of the office buildings of the United States House of Representatives in Washington, DC. The press conference will feature a prominent member of Congress. Expect another Call to Action encouraging our members, our SMRO partners, motorcyclists in general and other concerned citizens to attend.
At that time we will be issuing a formal letter to the Chairman of the NTSB asking him to reconsider their proposed lobbying of the states and asking that he consider the statistical facts related to our Motorcycle Safety Action Plan and its effectiveness with regard to Crash Avoidance and NOT Safer Crashing as the goal.
For strategic reasons, third phase of our initiative will be announced once we complete the necessary research and sufficient discussions have taken place. We will go on record, however, as stating that we will not rule out asking Congress to take action against the NTSB, as we have done with NHTSA in the past, should they continue to ignore the spirit of previous congressional mandates against federal agencies lobbying states on mandatory helmet laws.
Showing posts with label Big brother. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big brother. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
The NTSB Doesn't Get It!
A.B.A.T.E. OF PENNSYLVANIA RESPONSE TO THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD’S RECOMMENDATIONS OF 9-11-07
On 9-11 the NTSB issued recommendations to states to require all motorcyclists and their passengers to wear Department of Transportation federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) 218-compliant helmets.
A.B.A.T.E. of Pennsylvania, the Alliance of Bikers Aimed Toward Education, has expressed their opposition to the NTSB safety recommendations. Accident prevention saves lives, not federal mandates. Greater penalties for right-of-way violations and stricter laws for inattentive driving would be more effective. Motorist need to pay greater attention to the action of driving. Being behind a wheel of an automobile is NO time to multi-task.
Pennsylvania already has a helmet law. The General Assembly passed Senate Bill 259 in 2003. That legislation modified the existing mandatory motorcycle helmet law to provide qualified adult motorcycle operators and passengers with the option to decide what is best for themselves. Pennsylvania Senators and Representatives supported a minimum of two year riding experience or successful completion of an approved motorcycle rider education program as condition for optional helmet use by motorcycle operators 21 years of age or older.
While the law does allow freedom of choice in the use of helmets it also contains safeguards for those not yet trained or skilled enough to make an informed decision on helmet safety. Enactment of the freedom of choice bill on helmets represents what our founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution….that government works best with the consent of the governed.
Facts not fiction…
Since the helmet modification Pennsylvania has experienced a sharp rise in motorcycle sales and a dramatic increase in biker tourism. In 2003 there were 263,696 registered motorcycles. In 2006 that number increased to 335,720. In 2005 there were 205 motorcycle fatalities.
In 2006 the fatality rate decreased to 187.
Between 2000 (before helmets were made optional) and 2005 (after), motorcycle registrations in Pennsylvania increased 48.3%. Fatalities in motorcycle crashes also increased, but only 36%.
A study by the State Legislative Budget and Finance Committee in 2006 found an 8.6% decrease in motorcycle fatalities, per 10,000 registrations, from 2000 to 2005.
Most motorcycle fatalities in 2005 involved bikers who wore helmets. Only 42.6% involved known non-helmeted motorcyclists, and the report does not say what portion of them died of something other than head trauma.
Conclusion: The NTSB implies in its recommendation that thirty state governments have somehow "got it wrong" when it comes to the validity of universal mandatory helmet laws. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Most of these states have had, at one time or another, a universal mandatory helmet law, yet considered the results and modified their laws accordingly.
A.B.A.T.E. of PA believes that state legislators have more intelligence than the NTSB gives them credit for. A.B.A.T.E. of Pennsylvania states, “Nothing illustrates individual freedom more than bare-headed bikers, and many federal authorities detest freedom. We believe they will do anything to suppress it. “ The NTSB reached its recommendations with little or no input from the motorcycle community. This is just another incident of bureaucrats in Washington trying to ram regulations down the throats of all fifty states. We’ll have none of it.
On 9-11 the NTSB issued recommendations to states to require all motorcyclists and their passengers to wear Department of Transportation federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) 218-compliant helmets.
A.B.A.T.E. of Pennsylvania, the Alliance of Bikers Aimed Toward Education, has expressed their opposition to the NTSB safety recommendations. Accident prevention saves lives, not federal mandates. Greater penalties for right-of-way violations and stricter laws for inattentive driving would be more effective. Motorist need to pay greater attention to the action of driving. Being behind a wheel of an automobile is NO time to multi-task.
Pennsylvania already has a helmet law. The General Assembly passed Senate Bill 259 in 2003. That legislation modified the existing mandatory motorcycle helmet law to provide qualified adult motorcycle operators and passengers with the option to decide what is best for themselves. Pennsylvania Senators and Representatives supported a minimum of two year riding experience or successful completion of an approved motorcycle rider education program as condition for optional helmet use by motorcycle operators 21 years of age or older.
While the law does allow freedom of choice in the use of helmets it also contains safeguards for those not yet trained or skilled enough to make an informed decision on helmet safety. Enactment of the freedom of choice bill on helmets represents what our founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution….that government works best with the consent of the governed.
Facts not fiction…
Since the helmet modification Pennsylvania has experienced a sharp rise in motorcycle sales and a dramatic increase in biker tourism. In 2003 there were 263,696 registered motorcycles. In 2006 that number increased to 335,720. In 2005 there were 205 motorcycle fatalities.
In 2006 the fatality rate decreased to 187.
Between 2000 (before helmets were made optional) and 2005 (after), motorcycle registrations in Pennsylvania increased 48.3%. Fatalities in motorcycle crashes also increased, but only 36%.
A study by the State Legislative Budget and Finance Committee in 2006 found an 8.6% decrease in motorcycle fatalities, per 10,000 registrations, from 2000 to 2005.
Most motorcycle fatalities in 2005 involved bikers who wore helmets. Only 42.6% involved known non-helmeted motorcyclists, and the report does not say what portion of them died of something other than head trauma.
Conclusion: The NTSB implies in its recommendation that thirty state governments have somehow "got it wrong" when it comes to the validity of universal mandatory helmet laws. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Most of these states have had, at one time or another, a universal mandatory helmet law, yet considered the results and modified their laws accordingly.
A.B.A.T.E. of PA believes that state legislators have more intelligence than the NTSB gives them credit for. A.B.A.T.E. of Pennsylvania states, “Nothing illustrates individual freedom more than bare-headed bikers, and many federal authorities detest freedom. We believe they will do anything to suppress it. “ The NTSB reached its recommendations with little or no input from the motorcycle community. This is just another incident of bureaucrats in Washington trying to ram regulations down the throats of all fifty states. We’ll have none of it.
Friday, August 17, 2007
NCOM News
NCOM:
THE AIM/NCOM MOTORCYCLE E-NEWS SERVICE is brought to you by Aid to Injured Motorcyclists (A.I.M.) and the National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM), and is sponsored by the Law Offices of Richard M. Lester. For more information, call us at 1-(800) ON-A-BIKE or visit us on our website at http://www.ON-A-BIKE.com.
NCOM NEWS BYTES
Compiled & Edited by Bill Bish,
National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM)
BIKERS RALLY TO SAVE SAFETY FUNDING When word got out that the US House of Representatives was considering a transportation appropriations bill in late July, and an amendment to eliminate funding for motorcycle safety funds was being proposed, the biker community rallied to the call and succeeded in saving $6 million in grant money provided to 44 states for motorcycle safety programs.
After being reminded by scores of concerned riders across the country that saving lives is more important than saving a few dollars, the amendment by Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling was never introduced and the Section 2010 motorcycle safety funds remained intact as the $104.4 billion dollar FY2008 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill (HR 3074) went on to pass by a vote of 268-153.
TRAFFIC DEATHS REACH HISTORIC LOWS, WHILE MOTORCYCLE FATALITIES CLIMB Declining traffic deaths has lead to the lowest highway fatality rate ever recorded, announced the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The number of people who died on the nationÂ’s roads fell by 868 deaths last year, the largest drop in total fatalities in 15 years; representing a 2% decline that contributed to the historic low fatality rate of 1.42 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT), reported U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters.
But while total highway deaths fell from 43,510 in 2005 to 42,642 in 2006, the lowest level in five years, motorcycle fatalities continued to escalate for the ninth consecutive year following a decade of steadily declining fatality rates. Data from NHTSAÂ’s 2006 Annual Assessment of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and Injuries shows that 4,810 motorcyclists were killed on AmericaÂ’s roadways last year, an increase of 5.1 percent over 2005. Motorcycle rider fatalities now account for 11 percent of total fatalities, exceeding the number of pedestrian fatalities for the first time since NHTSA began collecting fatal motor vehicle crash data in 1975.
Many blame the increase on the rise in popularity of motorcycles, with states experiencing record numbers of registrations and dealers selling record numbers of new bikes year after year for over a decade. Other experts cite the aging ridership, bigger bikes, changing traffic mix, miles traveled and other factors.
A comprehensive study into the causation of traffic accidents involving motorcycles is expected to begin later this year at the Oklahoma Transportation Center at Oklahoma State University, the first such motorcycle-crash study since the Hurt Report in 1980.
The National Transportation Safety Board conducted a motorcycle safety forum late last year to explore safety concerns in that sector of transportation.
While driving has never been safer in the U.S., internationally the United States ranks 42nd of 48 countries measured in the number of highway fatalities per capita. And although the fatality rate has plummeted since 1970, when the U.S. led the world in road safety with the lowest death rate among industrialized countries reporting data, it now ranks 11th in fatalities per distance driven.
Safety experts say the reasons are many. Bella Dinh-Zarr, the North American director of Make Roads Safe, a nonprofit organization based in London, said other countries have stricter laws, better enforcement, more accessible public transportation, greater awareness, public support and more rigorous training and licensing standards.
But expert after expert said the real problem was one of culture. With personal freedom being a cornerstone of the United States, many states are loath to pass legislation that curtails them, even when it comes to road safety. So while the governments of other countries can easily pass laws to make driving safer, like a national ban on hand-held cellphone use, those laws here are left up to the states to impose, and that is often not so easy. Fred Wegman, managing director of the National Institute for Road Safety Research in the Netherlands, said attitudes were different in Europe. There, he said, safety is not just about the individual, but is the responsibility of society as a whole. “European countries fundamentally pay more political attention to road safety,” he said.
HELMETS DONÂ’T SAVE LOUISIANA MOTORCYCLISTS Despite passing a mandatory helmet law in 2004, motorcycle fatalities in Louisiana are on a record pace and on course for one of the worst totals in the country, Highway Safety Commission executive director James Champagne told attendees at a safety summit in Baton Rouge.
The summit, produced by the Louisiana Motorcyclist Safety and Awareness Committee and the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission was convened to decrease the number of motorcycle fatalities and injuries in Louisiana. Achieving that goal is urgent.
Champagne told summit attendees that more motorcycle fatalities are projected for this year in Louisiana than in any other year in the state's history. If the trend continues, we will have not only the state's worst year, but also one of the worst totals in the country.
At the Louisiana summit, safety officials pinpointed reasons for the alarming increase in motorcycle fatalities. One is lack of professional training. Champagne says training should be required before a cycle owner or rider can apply for a license.
Ultimately, according to Champagne, almost all the factors that contribute to the problem can be reduced by new legislation, enforcement of existing laws - and mandated education.
LOUD PIPES TICKET DISMISSED The first and only ticket that police have issued to a motorcyclist under Denver's controversial new noise ordinance has been dismissed. Attorney Wade Eldridge, himself a biker, challenged the law on behalf of his client, Stuart Sacks, who was pulled over in LoDo and ticketed for having an "unlawful modified muffler," records show.
"The officer neither inspected his bike to see if it had the stamp nor did he use a sound meter," Eldridge said. "So the most they would have had was the officer's gut feeling that it was too loud, which is not enough."
Designed to curb motorcycle noise, the controversial new ordinance took effect July 1st and limits noise levels to 82 decibels from a distance of 25 feet, and requires motorcyclists with bikes made after 1982 to have a muffler with an EPA noise-certification stamp.
Eldridge, who is the Aid to Injured Motorcyclists (A.I.M.) Attorney for Colorado and legal counsel for the Confederation of Clubs of Colorado, also claims the noise ordinance is unconstitutionally vague. The law "lends itself to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement," he told the Rocky Mountain News. "The police can stop you for whatever reason."
Eldridge said the law leaves enforcement up to the "unfettered discretion of the individual officer," adding that his client was told he was stopped because his pipes were too loud.
Police Capt. Eric Rubin, who used to head the Traffic Operations Bureau, didn't know the details of that stop but said officers are using their training and experience in the field "as reasonable suspicion to briefly stop the rider" and check for the EPA stamp.
But the city's decision to drop the case highlighted a fundamental flaw in the law - Denver police aren't equipped with the $1,000 noise monitors needed to make the charge stick, said Eldridge, adding that, "In any case in which it's properly challenged, the city has an impossible burden." The reason Assistant City Attorney April Snook cited in her motion to dismiss the case was the city was "unable to prove charge beyond a reasonable doubt."
Ellen Dumm, spokeswoman for the city's Environmental Health Department, said an "oversight" caused the case to be dismissed. "The police officer did not inspect the pipes for the required (Environmental Protection Agency) sticker," she said, adding that the dismissal was a "one-time" thing and that the ordinance's enforcement will result in quieter streets.
Eldridge points out that even police bikes may be louder than DenverÂ’s allowable limits. According to court documents, tests conducted by the city on police motorcycles found sound levels at redline of 81.3 decibels and 81.7 decibels, and since the accuracy of the sound meters the city used is within plus or minus .5 decibels, police motorcycles may be in violation of the new noise law, Eldridge said.
PATCH BAN AT STURGIS BAR SPURS BOYCOTT, POSSIBLE LEGISLATION A beef with Hells Angels could inspire legislation to protect wearing motorcycle-club “colors,” a state legislator told Rapid City Journal columnist Bill Harlan during Sturgis Bike Week. One-Eyed Jacks saloon on Main Street was boycotted during the rally because it is the only bar in town that bans motorcycle club insignia, and they even barred South Dakota State Representative Jim Putnam from entering while wearing the colors of his own dangerous motorcycle club, the Lawmakers.
“If this persists, I’ll consider it,” said Rep. Putnam, R-Armour, who sometimes wears a Sturgis motorcycle rally necktie during the legislative session. “Putt” is not only a long-time motorcyclist himself, but is also a long-serving member of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists Legislative Task Force (NCOM-LTF), and anti-biker discrimination legislation is on their agenda.
Putnam added that legislation protecting motorcycle attire passed the state House in the early 1990s. It failed in the Senate, he said, but a similar Minnesota law has survived court challenges.
Now, Putnam supports a boycott of the saloon. “I’m not going in there,” he told the Journal. But One-Eyed Jack's owner Ray Gold is just as adamant about keeping his new ban on “back patches,” which he told the newspaper is to keep out the Hells Angels, whose Sturgis headquarters is near the bar.
But the ban on patches also angered Louis Nobs of Hibbing, Minn., who was barred entry wearing his Soldiers for Jesus colors. “You can’t ban patches for just one group,” he said. “If you ban them for motorcyclists you have to ban them for bowling teams, the Knights of Columbus -- everyone.”
Nobs is on the board of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists, and he helped distribute 60,000 fliers calling for the boycott.
ChiPS STAR NEVER GOT MOTORCYCLE LICENSE TV biker cop Erik Estrada has revealed he never passed his motorcycle test. Estrada played California Highway Patrol motorcycle cop Ponch in 1970s hit CHiPs, reports The Sun.
But he never actually had a motorcycle license for real. Estrada, now 58, had to hurriedly arrange a bike test when he was assigned to the California Highway Patrol for a new reality TV show.
And it took him three attempts to pass before he could appear on “Back To The Grind”, a show that gets actors to try their TV jobs.
WEIRD NEWS: A motorcycle was once plucked out of the Los Angeles sewer system. It's the largest object ever found in there!
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “Knowledge is power (Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est).”Francis Bacon (1561 - 1626) English statesman and philosopher
THE AIM/NCOM MOTORCYCLE E-NEWS SERVICE is brought to you by Aid to Injured Motorcyclists (A.I.M.) and the National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM), and is sponsored by the Law Offices of Richard M. Lester. For more information, call us at 1-(800) ON-A-BIKE or visit us on our website at http://www.ON-A-BIKE.com.
NCOM NEWS BYTES
Compiled & Edited by Bill Bish,
National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM)
BIKERS RALLY TO SAVE SAFETY FUNDING When word got out that the US House of Representatives was considering a transportation appropriations bill in late July, and an amendment to eliminate funding for motorcycle safety funds was being proposed, the biker community rallied to the call and succeeded in saving $6 million in grant money provided to 44 states for motorcycle safety programs.
After being reminded by scores of concerned riders across the country that saving lives is more important than saving a few dollars, the amendment by Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling was never introduced and the Section 2010 motorcycle safety funds remained intact as the $104.4 billion dollar FY2008 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill (HR 3074) went on to pass by a vote of 268-153.
TRAFFIC DEATHS REACH HISTORIC LOWS, WHILE MOTORCYCLE FATALITIES CLIMB Declining traffic deaths has lead to the lowest highway fatality rate ever recorded, announced the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The number of people who died on the nationÂ’s roads fell by 868 deaths last year, the largest drop in total fatalities in 15 years; representing a 2% decline that contributed to the historic low fatality rate of 1.42 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT), reported U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters.
But while total highway deaths fell from 43,510 in 2005 to 42,642 in 2006, the lowest level in five years, motorcycle fatalities continued to escalate for the ninth consecutive year following a decade of steadily declining fatality rates. Data from NHTSAÂ’s 2006 Annual Assessment of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatalities and Injuries shows that 4,810 motorcyclists were killed on AmericaÂ’s roadways last year, an increase of 5.1 percent over 2005. Motorcycle rider fatalities now account for 11 percent of total fatalities, exceeding the number of pedestrian fatalities for the first time since NHTSA began collecting fatal motor vehicle crash data in 1975.
Many blame the increase on the rise in popularity of motorcycles, with states experiencing record numbers of registrations and dealers selling record numbers of new bikes year after year for over a decade. Other experts cite the aging ridership, bigger bikes, changing traffic mix, miles traveled and other factors.
A comprehensive study into the causation of traffic accidents involving motorcycles is expected to begin later this year at the Oklahoma Transportation Center at Oklahoma State University, the first such motorcycle-crash study since the Hurt Report in 1980.
The National Transportation Safety Board conducted a motorcycle safety forum late last year to explore safety concerns in that sector of transportation.
While driving has never been safer in the U.S., internationally the United States ranks 42nd of 48 countries measured in the number of highway fatalities per capita. And although the fatality rate has plummeted since 1970, when the U.S. led the world in road safety with the lowest death rate among industrialized countries reporting data, it now ranks 11th in fatalities per distance driven.
Safety experts say the reasons are many. Bella Dinh-Zarr, the North American director of Make Roads Safe, a nonprofit organization based in London, said other countries have stricter laws, better enforcement, more accessible public transportation, greater awareness, public support and more rigorous training and licensing standards.
But expert after expert said the real problem was one of culture. With personal freedom being a cornerstone of the United States, many states are loath to pass legislation that curtails them, even when it comes to road safety. So while the governments of other countries can easily pass laws to make driving safer, like a national ban on hand-held cellphone use, those laws here are left up to the states to impose, and that is often not so easy. Fred Wegman, managing director of the National Institute for Road Safety Research in the Netherlands, said attitudes were different in Europe. There, he said, safety is not just about the individual, but is the responsibility of society as a whole. “European countries fundamentally pay more political attention to road safety,” he said.
HELMETS DONÂ’T SAVE LOUISIANA MOTORCYCLISTS Despite passing a mandatory helmet law in 2004, motorcycle fatalities in Louisiana are on a record pace and on course for one of the worst totals in the country, Highway Safety Commission executive director James Champagne told attendees at a safety summit in Baton Rouge.
The summit, produced by the Louisiana Motorcyclist Safety and Awareness Committee and the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission was convened to decrease the number of motorcycle fatalities and injuries in Louisiana. Achieving that goal is urgent.
Champagne told summit attendees that more motorcycle fatalities are projected for this year in Louisiana than in any other year in the state's history. If the trend continues, we will have not only the state's worst year, but also one of the worst totals in the country.
At the Louisiana summit, safety officials pinpointed reasons for the alarming increase in motorcycle fatalities. One is lack of professional training. Champagne says training should be required before a cycle owner or rider can apply for a license.
Ultimately, according to Champagne, almost all the factors that contribute to the problem can be reduced by new legislation, enforcement of existing laws - and mandated education.
LOUD PIPES TICKET DISMISSED The first and only ticket that police have issued to a motorcyclist under Denver's controversial new noise ordinance has been dismissed. Attorney Wade Eldridge, himself a biker, challenged the law on behalf of his client, Stuart Sacks, who was pulled over in LoDo and ticketed for having an "unlawful modified muffler," records show.
"The officer neither inspected his bike to see if it had the stamp nor did he use a sound meter," Eldridge said. "So the most they would have had was the officer's gut feeling that it was too loud, which is not enough."
Designed to curb motorcycle noise, the controversial new ordinance took effect July 1st and limits noise levels to 82 decibels from a distance of 25 feet, and requires motorcyclists with bikes made after 1982 to have a muffler with an EPA noise-certification stamp.
Eldridge, who is the Aid to Injured Motorcyclists (A.I.M.) Attorney for Colorado and legal counsel for the Confederation of Clubs of Colorado, also claims the noise ordinance is unconstitutionally vague. The law "lends itself to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement," he told the Rocky Mountain News. "The police can stop you for whatever reason."
Eldridge said the law leaves enforcement up to the "unfettered discretion of the individual officer," adding that his client was told he was stopped because his pipes were too loud.
Police Capt. Eric Rubin, who used to head the Traffic Operations Bureau, didn't know the details of that stop but said officers are using their training and experience in the field "as reasonable suspicion to briefly stop the rider" and check for the EPA stamp.
But the city's decision to drop the case highlighted a fundamental flaw in the law - Denver police aren't equipped with the $1,000 noise monitors needed to make the charge stick, said Eldridge, adding that, "In any case in which it's properly challenged, the city has an impossible burden." The reason Assistant City Attorney April Snook cited in her motion to dismiss the case was the city was "unable to prove charge beyond a reasonable doubt."
Ellen Dumm, spokeswoman for the city's Environmental Health Department, said an "oversight" caused the case to be dismissed. "The police officer did not inspect the pipes for the required (Environmental Protection Agency) sticker," she said, adding that the dismissal was a "one-time" thing and that the ordinance's enforcement will result in quieter streets.
Eldridge points out that even police bikes may be louder than DenverÂ’s allowable limits. According to court documents, tests conducted by the city on police motorcycles found sound levels at redline of 81.3 decibels and 81.7 decibels, and since the accuracy of the sound meters the city used is within plus or minus .5 decibels, police motorcycles may be in violation of the new noise law, Eldridge said.
PATCH BAN AT STURGIS BAR SPURS BOYCOTT, POSSIBLE LEGISLATION A beef with Hells Angels could inspire legislation to protect wearing motorcycle-club “colors,” a state legislator told Rapid City Journal columnist Bill Harlan during Sturgis Bike Week. One-Eyed Jacks saloon on Main Street was boycotted during the rally because it is the only bar in town that bans motorcycle club insignia, and they even barred South Dakota State Representative Jim Putnam from entering while wearing the colors of his own dangerous motorcycle club, the Lawmakers.
“If this persists, I’ll consider it,” said Rep. Putnam, R-Armour, who sometimes wears a Sturgis motorcycle rally necktie during the legislative session. “Putt” is not only a long-time motorcyclist himself, but is also a long-serving member of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists Legislative Task Force (NCOM-LTF), and anti-biker discrimination legislation is on their agenda.
Putnam added that legislation protecting motorcycle attire passed the state House in the early 1990s. It failed in the Senate, he said, but a similar Minnesota law has survived court challenges.
Now, Putnam supports a boycott of the saloon. “I’m not going in there,” he told the Journal. But One-Eyed Jack's owner Ray Gold is just as adamant about keeping his new ban on “back patches,” which he told the newspaper is to keep out the Hells Angels, whose Sturgis headquarters is near the bar.
But the ban on patches also angered Louis Nobs of Hibbing, Minn., who was barred entry wearing his Soldiers for Jesus colors. “You can’t ban patches for just one group,” he said. “If you ban them for motorcyclists you have to ban them for bowling teams, the Knights of Columbus -- everyone.”
Nobs is on the board of the National Coalition of Motorcyclists, and he helped distribute 60,000 fliers calling for the boycott.
ChiPS STAR NEVER GOT MOTORCYCLE LICENSE TV biker cop Erik Estrada has revealed he never passed his motorcycle test. Estrada played California Highway Patrol motorcycle cop Ponch in 1970s hit CHiPs, reports The Sun.
But he never actually had a motorcycle license for real. Estrada, now 58, had to hurriedly arrange a bike test when he was assigned to the California Highway Patrol for a new reality TV show.
And it took him three attempts to pass before he could appear on “Back To The Grind”, a show that gets actors to try their TV jobs.
WEIRD NEWS: A motorcycle was once plucked out of the Los Angeles sewer system. It's the largest object ever found in there!
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “Knowledge is power (Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est).”Francis Bacon (1561 - 1626) English statesman and philosopher
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Who's Your Nanny?
Read this real closely. AHAS may be the scariest of all the nanny groups.
Remarks of Judith Lee StonePresident of Advocates for Auto and Highway Safety And Member of the Advisory Board of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light RunningMonday, August 6, 2007
Recently the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released the annual motor vehicle fatality toll for 2006 that indicates minor overall improvement over 2005, but the total number of fatalities last year – 42,642 -- is still one of the largest in the last decade.The small decrease clearly represents neither steady nor sustained progress toward addressing the number one killer of all Americans between the ages of 4 and 34.
I see two major ironies in these numbers, related to today’s topic: First, the number of deaths, and the death rate -- 1.42 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled – still leave the U.S. lagging behind other industrialized nations throughout the world.
Within a few days of NHTSA’s announcement, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Transport Forum reported that the U.S. ranks 42nd out of 48 countries in motor vehicle deaths, based on number of fatalities per capita. The OECD report shows that Australia, Britain, France, Germany and Japan dramatically outperformed the U.S. in deaths per capita, and when measuring lowest death rates by miles driven, the U.S. ranked only 11th.
Our low global ranking may come as a surprise to some. The second irony that occurs to me is that most of the countries that do better than the U.S. in getting a handle on this major public health problem have been benefiting from wide use of automated enforcement, usually without public opposition, for decades. So we shouldn’t be surprised they do better than we do. Why wouldn’t governments struggling to contain costs and looking for effective ways to protect families choose readily-available technologies that lead to safer roads and neighborhoods, and why wouldn’t they see the results of their actions in the bottom line?
If you knew there was a proven technological application that would cure a lifethreatening disease diagnosed by your doctor, would you settle for anything less in the hospital?In this country, we know the solutions to reducing highway deaths and injuries but it seems we are often lacking the political leadership to enact the necessary laws and regulations to do so. We need to construct a much better safety policy infrastructure that is then vigorously enforced, if we want sizeable reductions in the annual motor vehicle crash and fatality picture.
With photo enforcement now being used in a majority of states and over 200 localities, there may be an assumption that the U.S. is implementing this technology as effectively as possible. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and there is a need for federal leadership and positive guidance to the states.
Only 17 states and the District of Columbia have enabling legislation to permit and define how photo enforcement should be used. And, only three states have passed such legislation in recent years. Despite overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of photo enforcement to combat red light running and speeding both here and abroad, there has been very little encouragement to our state legislatures for taking such action from the federal level.
Growth in the use of automated enforcement has come almost entirely from communities – having already appealed to state representatives, but unwilling to wait any longer – that have proceeded with implementing programs without state authorization. These systems are working well throughout the nation, reducing crashes, deaths and injuries. Automated enforcement is predictably effective and a proven highway safety vaccine.
The majority of Americans agree that enforcement on our roadways is too lax.Poll after poll, including surveys conducted for my own organization by Lou Harris starting nearly 10 years ago, indicate high levels of support for automated enforcement to stop red light running and speeding. The politicians and other government leaders need not worry about a backlash.
As a member of the Advisory Board of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running and the President of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, I want to commend this report, Focus on Safety, and am glad it is being sent to the National Surface Transportation Commission. I urge the Commission to stress the importance of state enabling legislation by recommending in their report to Congress that states adopt such legislation to authorize the use of photo enforcement for red light running and speeding. While every American community may not need or choose to use automated enforcement, it should be an option that is available at the determination of law enforcement and traffic control experts in each jurisdiction throughout the country.
Thank you.
Remarks of Judith Lee StonePresident of Advocates for Auto and Highway Safety And Member of the Advisory Board of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light RunningMonday, August 6, 2007
Recently the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released the annual motor vehicle fatality toll for 2006 that indicates minor overall improvement over 2005, but the total number of fatalities last year – 42,642 -- is still one of the largest in the last decade.The small decrease clearly represents neither steady nor sustained progress toward addressing the number one killer of all Americans between the ages of 4 and 34.
I see two major ironies in these numbers, related to today’s topic: First, the number of deaths, and the death rate -- 1.42 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled – still leave the U.S. lagging behind other industrialized nations throughout the world.
Within a few days of NHTSA’s announcement, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Transport Forum reported that the U.S. ranks 42nd out of 48 countries in motor vehicle deaths, based on number of fatalities per capita. The OECD report shows that Australia, Britain, France, Germany and Japan dramatically outperformed the U.S. in deaths per capita, and when measuring lowest death rates by miles driven, the U.S. ranked only 11th.
Our low global ranking may come as a surprise to some. The second irony that occurs to me is that most of the countries that do better than the U.S. in getting a handle on this major public health problem have been benefiting from wide use of automated enforcement, usually without public opposition, for decades. So we shouldn’t be surprised they do better than we do. Why wouldn’t governments struggling to contain costs and looking for effective ways to protect families choose readily-available technologies that lead to safer roads and neighborhoods, and why wouldn’t they see the results of their actions in the bottom line?
If you knew there was a proven technological application that would cure a lifethreatening disease diagnosed by your doctor, would you settle for anything less in the hospital?In this country, we know the solutions to reducing highway deaths and injuries but it seems we are often lacking the political leadership to enact the necessary laws and regulations to do so. We need to construct a much better safety policy infrastructure that is then vigorously enforced, if we want sizeable reductions in the annual motor vehicle crash and fatality picture.
With photo enforcement now being used in a majority of states and over 200 localities, there may be an assumption that the U.S. is implementing this technology as effectively as possible. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and there is a need for federal leadership and positive guidance to the states.
Only 17 states and the District of Columbia have enabling legislation to permit and define how photo enforcement should be used. And, only three states have passed such legislation in recent years. Despite overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of photo enforcement to combat red light running and speeding both here and abroad, there has been very little encouragement to our state legislatures for taking such action from the federal level.
Growth in the use of automated enforcement has come almost entirely from communities – having already appealed to state representatives, but unwilling to wait any longer – that have proceeded with implementing programs without state authorization. These systems are working well throughout the nation, reducing crashes, deaths and injuries. Automated enforcement is predictably effective and a proven highway safety vaccine.
The majority of Americans agree that enforcement on our roadways is too lax.Poll after poll, including surveys conducted for my own organization by Lou Harris starting nearly 10 years ago, indicate high levels of support for automated enforcement to stop red light running and speeding. The politicians and other government leaders need not worry about a backlash.
As a member of the Advisory Board of the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running and the President of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, I want to commend this report, Focus on Safety, and am glad it is being sent to the National Surface Transportation Commission. I urge the Commission to stress the importance of state enabling legislation by recommending in their report to Congress that states adopt such legislation to authorize the use of photo enforcement for red light running and speeding. While every American community may not need or choose to use automated enforcement, it should be an option that is available at the determination of law enforcement and traffic control experts in each jurisdiction throughout the country.
Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
